U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

24–981 PDF 2005

S. HRG. 109–209

INVASIVE SPECIES

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON

INVASIVE SPECIES

VOLCANO, HI, AUGUST 9, 2005

(

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

(II)

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico, Chairman 

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho 

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

RICHARD M. BURR, North Carolina, 

MEL MARTINEZ, Florida 

JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri 

CONRAD BURNS, Montana 

GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia 

GORDON SMITH, Oregon 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey 

KEN SALAZAR, Colorado

ALEX FLINT, Staff Director 

JUDITH K. PENSABENE, Chief Counsel 

ROBERT M. SIMON, Democratic Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Democratic Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming, Chairman 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee, Vice Chairman

GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia 

RICHARD M. BURR, North Carolina 

MEL MARTINEZ, Florida 

GORDON SMITH, Oregon 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey 

KEN SALAZAR, Colorado

PETE V. DOMENICI and JEFF BINGAMAN are Ex Officio Members of the Subcommittee

THOMAS LILLIE, Professional Staff Member 

DAVID BROOKS, Democratic Senior Counsel 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

Page

Akaka, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii .............................................. 1

Fox, Mark R., Director of External Affairs, The Nature Conservancy of Hawaii ........................................................................................................................ 15

Leialoha, Julie, Manager, Big Island Invasive Species Committee, Hilo, HI ..... 36

Penniman, Teya M., Manager, Maui Invasive Species Committee, Makawao, 

HI .......................................................................................................................... 38

Reeser, Donald, Haleakala National Park Volunteer ........................................... 8

Reimer, Neil, Ph.D., Plant Quarantine Branch Chief, Hawaii Department 

of Agriculture ........................................................................................................ 26

Simmons, Peter, Regional Asset Manager, Land Assets Division, Endowment 

Group .................................................................................................................... 41

Soukup, Dr. Michael, Associate Director for Natural Resources, Stewardship 

and Science, National Park Service, Department of the Interior .................... 3

Wilkinson, Dr. Mindy, Invasive Species Coordinator, Hawaii Department of 

Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife ..................... 21

APPENDIX 

Responses to additional questions .......................................................................... 49

(1)

INVASIVE SPECIES 

TUESDAY, AUGUST 9, 2005

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Volcano, Hawaii. 

The subcommittee met pursuant to notice at 10:06 a.m., at Volcanoes National Park, Kilauea Visitor Center, Volcano, Hawaii, Hon. 

Daniel Akaka presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL AKAKA,

SENATOR FROM HAWAII 

Senator AKAKA. This hearing of the Subcommittee on National 

Parks of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources will 

come to order. I would like to welcome everyone this morning to 

the hearing. The purpose of the hearing is to examine issues concerning the management of invasive species in and around national 

parks and to look at possible legislative and partnership solutions. 

I am very glad to be able to hold this hearing here at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, which faces major challenges in managing 

invasive species. 

I would like to thank Senator Craig Thomas of Wyoming, who is 

a good friend. We work very well together, and he’s the chairman 

of this subcommittee; and Senator Pete Domenici and Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, the chairman and ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee—that’s another way of saying ‘‘Interior’’—for agreeing to this field hearing in Hawaii. 

I would also like to thank Tom Lillie, who is seated here, dressed 

real well, next to the flag, and thank him for being here. He is representing the subcommittee majority committee staff. I want to 

thank him for all his help and to welcome him here on his first—

I want to stress that—his first visit to the Big Island. 

I want to say mahalo nui loa to Cindy, who was up here with 

the mayor, Cindy Orlando, the superintendent here at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, for allowing us to use this facility and to 

thank her for the assistance and that of her staff—great staff—not 

only with helping us put this hearing on, but also for making this 

hearing room look so wonderful today. Let’s give them a big hand. 

[Applause.] 

Senator AKAKA. You know, I must admit to you this is a different 

kind of hearing room for me. Usually Tom Lillie and Dave here and 

I sit in hearing rooms up there, and it doesn’t look like this, so it’s 

wonderful. Thank you so much for how you’ve transformed this 

room into this kind of a hearing room. 

2

In addition, I would like to recognize Holly Bundock, who is here 

from the National Park Services Pacific West regional office in 

California and who has spent many days helping us with this hearing. 

Holly, will you stand up so they can see. 

[Applause.] 

Senator AKAKA. And I haven’t mentioned Dave here. Dave is my 

staff in this subcommittee. And next to Dave is another staff, Shirley, who handles this part of my office. I would also like to welcome 

Councilman Bob Jacobson. Bob, are you here? 

Mr. JACOBSON. Aloha. 

Senator AKAKA. Aloha. Thank you for being here, Bob. 

Bob is a leader in the fight against invasive species, especially 

of the coqui frogs. Mahalo for coming today and for your hard work, 

Bob, on invasive species. 

As everyone here is aware, invasive species, whether plants, animals, or microscopic organisms, are causing billions and billions of 

dollars in damages throughout the United States and are a major 

threat to the survival of several threatened and endangered species. Nowhere, however, are the impacts of invasive species greater 

than here in Hawaii. 

Our State, which is known for its biodiversity, has more than 

10,000 species found nowhere else on Earth. Unfortunately, 

invasive species are the primary cause of decline of Hawaii’s 

threatened and endangered species. This is a major concern because of the 114 species that have become extinct during the first 

20 years of the Endangered Species Act, almost half were in Hawaii. 

Invasive species also cause hundreds of millions of dollars in 

damages to Hawaii’s agricultural industry and floricultural products, Hawaii’s real estate, and Hawaii’s water quality; and some 

species significantly increase the threat of wildfires. As serious as 

these problems are, we are fortunate that there are strong efforts 

at the Federal, State, and local level in Hawaii to combat invasive 

species threats. I wanted to hold a hearing here, in large part, to 

take advantage of the unique local knowledge and expertise, and 

I’m excited, really excited, to have such a distinguished group of 

witnesses appearing at this hearing today. 

Last month, I introduced S. 1541, the Public Land Protection and 

Conservation Act, legislation that would encourage Federal, State, 

local, and tribal governments, nonprofit organizations and private 

entities, to work together through a cost-shared cooperative grant 

program to control and mitigate the spread of invasive species. 

Senator Inouye, Senator Levin, and Senator Lautenberg are also 

original co-sponsors of this legislation. This bill is not a cure-all for 

the many problems we are facing, but I hope if enacted into law, 

will provide land managers and other involved governments and 

organizations with an additional tool to help address the invasive 

species management issues. While my bill is not the direct subject 

of this hearing, I welcome any thoughts from the witnesses on this 

bill or other legislative proposals that would assist in this challenge. 

Before we hear from our first panel of witnesses, I would like to 

cover a few administrative details. As this is an official Senate 

3

hearing, all written statements and any other materials submitted 

will be included in their entirety in the hearing record. Anyone 

may submit additional statements after the hearing to be included 

in the record. You can mail your statement to any of my offices, 

and we’ll forward it to the committee, or you can send it directly 

to the committee in Washington. The hearing record will remain 

open for 2 weeks. 

Finally, I would respectfully ask our witnesses today to please 

try and limit your oral remarks to approximately 5 minutes so that 

we can have enough time for questions and any follow-up discussions. 

With that, is there anything else? I also would like to welcome 

two very special people who have come today, Ms. Suzanne Case. 

Suzanne, will you please stand up? Suzanne is executive director 

of the Nature Conservancy of Hawaii. Thank you for being here. 

And Ms. Geri Bell. I thought I caught sight of you, Geri. Aloha. 

How are you, Geri? Geri is a superintendent at Pu’uhonua O 

Honaunau National Historical Park, and that’s on the other side of 

the island, in Kona. I want to thank both of you for being here. 

Is there anybody else? Well, thank you so much for being here. 

And I want you folks to feel relaxed and comfortable here, especially in this kind of setting. And now I’ll turn on the light to begin. 

With that, I’d like to begin the hearing by asking our first panel 

to come forth. Dr. Mike Soukup, Associate Director of National 

Park Service in Washington, DC. Thank you for going with us last 

night to look at the lava flow. 

And Mr. Don Reeser of Makawao, the former superintendent of 

Haleakala National Park, who just retired in the last few weeks. 

Congratulations, Don. Best wishes to you, and thank you for coming for the hearing today. 

I also would like to welcome Dr. Lloyd Loope, who is accompanying Dr. Soukup and who I have asked to be here, from the 

U.S. Geological Survey of Hawaii, to serve as a resource witness 

today so that he can share his insights from his work on invasive 

species. Dr. Loope, I’ll come back to you when we get to the questions. 

May I make a request here—and I nearly did not say it, but we 

normally say this because people sometimes, without realizing it, 

do have it on. If you have any cell phones, please turn them off 

during the hearing, we’d certainly appreciate that. 

Thank you very much, panel. 

Dr. Soukup, welcome, and please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF DR. MICHAEL SOUKUP, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR 

FOR NATURAL RESOURCES, STEWARDSHIP AND SCIENCE, 

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Dr. SOUKUP. Thank you, Senator. I very much appreciate this opportunity to be here and your convening this hearing on a major 

issue that affects the American public in many ways, and especially, I believe, affects the National Park System and the health 

of the systems that we manage. 

I also want to thank everyone for the hospitality that is apparently just very commonplace here. It’s been very warming. I’m from 

4

that other place that Mr. Kim mentioned. I’m very happy to be 

here in such a nice setting. 

With me on this panel are two experts in invasives and invasives 

in Hawaii. Don Reeser is the recently retired superintendent of 

Haleakala National Park, and Dr. Lloyd Loope is a former NPS scientist, National Park Service scientist, now with USGS. 

I would like to submit my written testimony, Senator, along with 

two technical papers authored by Dr. Loope for the record and 

briefly summarize my written testimony. 

Senator AKAKA. They will be included in the record. 

Dr. SOUKUP. Thank you, sir. 

Invasive species are one of the greatest threats to our natural 

and cultural heritage. Invasives are responsible for the listing of 42 

percent of the endangered species listed under the Endangered 

Species Act. Invasives infest 2.6 million acres of the 83 million 

acres of national parks. 

Nowhere in the Nation, as was said earlier, is this issue more 

critical than here in Hawaii. New arrivals such as the rust fungus, 

Metrosideros polymorpha, for instance, threatens the ’Ohi’a tree 

and has now been found in nurseries in Oahu and Maui, and no 

one knows exactly the extent of what that rust will do to such important species in the Hawaii forests. Other invasives threaten important coral reef communities, and I got a chance to look at some 

of that recently on this trip, and also threatens not only the coral 

reef communities, but the tourism industry. 

As you know, Senator, the National Park Service has been mandated by Congress to maintain park resources unimpaired, for the 

enjoyment of present and future generations. For some time, the 

service has recognized and attempted to control invasives and has 

many successes, especially here in Hawaii. However, the problem 

grows. At the close of the 20th century, the National Park Service 

committed, with the help of Congress, to doubling its capability in 

natural resources management to meet the difficult issues of the 

21st century. This initiative we call the Natural Resource Challenge. For the first time, National Parks will have a systematic inventory of its parks. For the first time, all parks will be monitored 

to help us with early detection and early intervention of invasive 

species. 

An important element of the Natural Resource Challenge is the 

creation of 16 Exotic Plant Management Teams. We call them 

EPMTs. We couldn’t think of a better name. We tried to call them 

SWAT teams, but that seemed too confrontational. Perhaps they 

should be ‘‘swath’’ teams. These teams, which include the Pacific 

Islands Exotic Plant Management Team, which is based here in 

Hawaii Volcanoes are highly trained mobile teams that serve 209 

parks nationwide and work in partnership with States and groups 

like the Student Conservation Association. Last year, the teams leveraged over $4 million, had 4,000 hours of volunteer service, and 

treated nearly 50,000 acres. 

The invasives issue requires coordination and partnerships to effectively attack such a pervasive problem. Hawaii has important 

examples of partnerships like the Maui Invasive Species Committee, that brings together the resources of the Federal Government, States, and individuals. 

5

Here at Hawaii Volcanoes, the Olaa-Kilauea Partnership is a cooperative management effort involving State and Federal entities 

and willing private landowners which protect the survival of native 

ecosystems on 420,000 acres. Other partners include the Puu 

Makaala National Area Reserve and the Kamehameha Schools, the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the USGS, U.S. Forest Service, and 

the Nature Conservancy. The Nature Conservancy is a valuable 

partner for the National Park Service, and for important invasive 

projects nationwide. 

There are many barriers, however, to a more effective approach, 

and I would like to just mention one. An important one for the National Park Service is that we lack authorization to spend Federal 

funds on projects that treat invasives on lands adjacent to our borders where there is a clear and direct benefit to parks by spending 

that money in partnership. A recent GAO report cited this lack of 

authority as a significant impediment. 

Accordingly, the administration has now drafted a legislative 

proposal entitled the National Resource Protection Cooperative 

Agreement Act. This proposal would provide the Secretary of the 

Interior authority to protect park resources through collaborative 

efforts in lands inside and outside of National Park System units. 

The legislative proposal would ensure the protection of private 

property rights by authorizing collaborations with willing private 

landowners. 

Senator, I will conclude with thanking you again for your efforts 

to bring recognition to this important and growing issue, and I 

would be happy to try to answer any questions you may have. 

Thank you, mahalo. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Soukup follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL SOUKUP, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR NATURAL

RESOURCE STEWARDSHIP AND SCIENCE, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF

THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to provide an update to the Committee on the accomplishments of the National Park Service in battling invasive 

species on park lands. 

Invasive species proliferation is considered one of the greatest threats to our natural and cultural heritage. Invasive species encroachment is implicated in the listing of 42% of all species protected by the Endangered Species Act. Invasive plants 

are estimated to cause more than $20 billion per year in economic damages and affect millions of acres of public and private lands across the country. Of the 83 million acres managed by the National Park Service, 2.6 million acres are infested by 

invasive plants. Examples of invasive animal species plaguing the parks include 

feral pigs and goats, hemlock woolly adelgid insect, and New Zealand mudsnail. 

Recognizing that invasive species cross geographic and jurisdictional boundaries, 

collaborative efforts among Federal, State, and local entities and willing private 

landowners can be highly effective in managing a shared problem. For the National 

Park Service, one of the barriers to such collaboration is the lack of the authority 

to expend Federal funds for work outside of lands it manages where there is a clear 

and direct benefit to park natural resources. According to a recent General Accounting Office (GAO) report from February 2005, of the four major land management 

agencies examined by the GAO, the National Park Service was the only Federal 

agency that did not have this authority. This lack of consistency among Federal 

agencies is an impediment to effective collaboration and cooperation among potential partners to manage invasive species, especially with willing adjacent landowners. 

To address this problem, the Administration recently has transmitted to Congress 

a draft legislative proposal entitled, ‘‘the Natural Resource Protection Cooperative 

Agreement Act.’’ The proposal would provide the Secretary the authority to protect 

park resources through collaborative efforts on lands inside or outside of National 

6

Park System units. The legislative proposal would ensure the protection of private 

property rights by only authorizing collaborations with willing private landowners. 

With the continual arrival of new invaders to Hawaii, the problem of non-native 

species occupying park areas only increases. For example, the Coqui comun frogs, 

which reach cacophonous densities estimated to be between 10,000 and 40,000 per 

acre, are beginning to appear in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Coqui comun will 

decimate forest invertebrate fauna and significantly alter nutrient cycling in Hawaiian forests, while also degrading the natural quiet of the park and impacting the 

tourist industry. A recently arrived rust, Metrosideros polymorpha, found on ohia 

trees in plant nurseries on Oahu and Maui has the potential to seriously harm this 

most abundant native tree species and other key species in native ecosystems in Hawaii. 

Invasive marine algae are rapidly invading the Hawaiian Islands and other Pacific Island groups. These invaders are both financially and ecologically devastating. 

They can overgrow and kill corals, devastate coral habitat, alter ecosystem processes, and significantly impact the health and biodiversity of coral reef communities. 

With Hawaii’s tourism industry so dependent on marine resources, these impacts 

can result in major financial losses. 

The Park Service is embarking on a two-year project to rapidly assess the threat 

from invasive marine plants within and adjacent to National Parks in Hawaii, 

Guam, Saipan, and American Samoa. Given the known distribution of invasive marine plants in shallow water habitats of the Hawaiian Islands, we must document 

these plant distributions and abundance in the Pacific Island Parks before they 

cause damage to marine resources and native or endemic species are lost. One area 

that has been invaded is Kaloko fishpond, located in Kaloko-Honokohau National 

Historical Park on the Kona coast of Hawaii. The historic fishpond is an 11-acre, 

spring-fed, natural embayment enclosed by a man-made stone wall. Red alga has 

entered the pond and currently covers about a third of the bottom. In addition to 

restoring this important native Hawaiian historic site, our concern is that the 

invasive algae will spread to the reef adjacent to the fishpond and throughout the 

Kona coastline. In cooperation with University of Hawaii, the Park Service is conducting a removal project to evaluate methods to diminish and control this invasion 

and prevent its spread. These methods include biological control using herbivorous 

fish, manual removal, shading, and re-cropping. 

The National Park Service has been a pioneer in combating threats to resources 

posed by invasive species. This work began with the grassroots efforts of staff in 

many parks; a few examples include the removal of feral pigs at Great Smoky 

Mountains National Park, burros at Grand Canyon National Park and purple 

loosestrife at Acadia National Park. As more and more invasives have encroached 

on parklands over the last century, the National Park Service has expanded its efforts to develop more complex and aggressive programs and policies to prevent, control and manage invasive species. For example, at Yellowstone National Park, staff 

has removed thousands of nonnative lake trout since 2000 because they were displacing native cutthroat trout, an important food source for grizzly bears. In New 

Mexico, invasive African oryx grew to a herd numbering more than 4,000 in White 

Sands National Monument. Because of resource damage, the park initiated a comprehensive control program in 1999 and successfully removed all oryx from the 

park. At St. Croix National Scenic Riverway in Wisconsin and Minnesota, a boat 

inspection program has been initiated with the State of Minnesota and Federal 

agencies to prevent the spread of invasive aquatic plants and zebra mussels into the 

Riverway. This prevention program was initiated to stop the introduction of zebra 

mussels that were outcompeting threatened and endangered native mussels. By aggressively taking steps to eliminate or prevent establishment of invasive species, native populations of animal and plant species can thrive on parklands. 

As part of the National Park Service’s Natural Resource Challenge, a new management strategy was created for addressing invasive species in parks. Modeled 

after the approach used in wildland fire fighting, field-based Exotic Plant Management Teams (EPMTs) provide highly trained, mobile strike forces of plant management specialists who assist parks in the identification, treatment, control, restoration, and monitoring of areas infested with invasive plants. There are now 16 teams 

covering 209 parks nationwide. This successful model has now been adopted by the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Student Conservation Association as well. 

The success of the EPMTs derives from its ability to adapt to local conditions and 

needs while still serving multiple parks within a broad geographic area. 

The Department of the Interior’s Cooperative Conservation Initiative (CCI) is an 

innovative and collaborative program through which land management agencies 

partner with landowners and communities to battle invasive species and restore 

natural areas. During 2003-2004, the National Park Service has received about $6 

7

million dollars for invasive species work, primarily weed management efforts. Since 

2000, the EPMTs have entered into over 40 different cooperative efforts throughout 

the United States with more than $4 million dollars in matching support from public and private sources. In 2004 alone, volunteers contributed over 4,000 hours to 

our weed management efforts. In addition, we anticipate that the Noxious Weed Act 

recently passed by Congress will help provide financial and technical support to our 

State partners in controlling weeds. Finally, through a new Student Conservation 

Association partnership, student teams are being fielded to build our capacity and 

to train new invasive species management professionals to work beyond our boundaries. 

As a result of over 20 years of active ecosystem management starting with fencing 

and feral animal control, followed by invasive plant control and rare plant stabilization, spectacular recovery of native vegetation and associated fauna have occurred 

at Haleakala National Park, protecting one of the richest and most ecologically intact ecosystems within the National Park System. Thirteen endangered plants and 

five endangered birds are harbored on parklands along with dozens of rare plants 

and a diverse array of native arthropods. However, many non-native species threaten to invade native habitats at the park potentially reversing this recovery. For example, miconia, an invasive tree, feared as the ‘‘green cancer’’, would transform arguably the best remaining Hawaiian rainforest, and the only remaining home of two 

critically endangered forest birds, the Maui Parrotbill and Akohekohe, into the 

green and purple monoculture that has become the fate of the forests in Tahiti. 

Pampas grass and silk oak also threaten to convert native grasslands and forests 

into single invasive species stands. So far these three species have been eradicated 

from parklands through a joint partnership effort. However, reinvasion from adjacent lands remains a threat. 

Invasive animals are perhaps an even more imminent threat to parks in Hawaii. 

For example, the veiled chameleon has escaped as a result of the illegal pet trade 

and is considered by island biologists to have the potential for decimating native 

bird populations similar to what the brown tree snake has done on Guam. Much 

more work needs to be done to keep these and other invasives out of parks. 

As mentioned above, collaborative efforts are critical in managing the problem of 

invasive species. To this end, the National Park Service has been an active member 

on many partnership committees. At the national level, the National Park Service 

participates in a number of interagency partnerships and cooperative efforts of the 

National Invasive Species Council (NISC), including the control of invasive plants 

such as tamarisk and leafy spurge in the western United States. NISC is an interdepartmental Council charged with coordinating Federal invasive species programs 

and is co-chaired by Secretary Norton. The National Park Service participates in the 

taxa-focused Federal coordinating organizations for invasive species, the Federal 

Interagency Committee for the Management of Noxious and Exotic Weeds 

(FICMNEW), the Federal Interagency Committee on Invasive Terrestrial Animals 

and Pathogens (ITAP), and was recently invited to be a Federal member of the 

Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force. Participation in these national efforts provides the National Park Service with opportunities to draw on broad expertise, identify shared priorities, pool resources, and work collaboratively on invasive species 

issues of national significance. 

The National Park Service also works actively with partners at the regional and 

local levels. For example, we are a member of the Maui Invasive Species Committee, 

an informal partnership of private, county, State and Federal agencies and individuals that has for the last three years worked to control invasive species through 

$1.6 million dollars in county and State grants. A similar effort led by the Big Island Invasive Species Committee is working to coordinate invasive management actions on the island. 

I would like to highlight an example of a very successful public-private partnership, which is occurring here at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. The Olaa-Kilauea 

Partnership on the island of Hawaii is a cooperative land management effort involving State and Federal entities and willing private landowners. The goals of the partnership are to enhance the long-term survival of native ecosystems and manage 

420,000 acres across multiple ownership boundaries. Management and research are 

currently focused on removing or reducing impacts from feral animals such as pigs, 

invasive plants and non-native predators, restoring native habitat and endangered 

species, and providing education and work training in fencing, native plant horticulture and other conservation work to Kulani Correctional Facility inmates. Other 

partners include the Puu Makaala Natural Area Reserve, the Kamehameha Schools, 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the USGS Biological Resources Division, the 

USDA Forest Service, and the Nature Conservancy. The Partnership has jointly 

8

fenced 14,100 acres on State and private lands and eliminated the feral pig population from 9,800 acres, while controlling feral pigs in an additional 4,300 acres. 

The Partnership also offers valuable educational and cultural benefits by providing staff and field sites for hands-on environmental educational activities for 

teacher workshops and student programs. The private landowner involved in the 

Partnership plans to restore the ranch adjacent to the park and use the entire area 

for conservation, cultural enrichment and education. 

The most cost-effective and successful strategy for battling invasive species is preventing them from ever entering our national parks. New and innovative programs 

are being established in a handful of parks to institutionalize prevention programs. 

In cases where this is not possible, the sooner new introductions are detected and 

addressed the greater the likelihood of eradication. The National Park Service’s Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Program networks are helping parks develop monitoring programs for the detection of new invasions so a quick response can ultimately remove the threat before it becomes unmanageable. The information is also 

used by EMPTs for identifying treatment areas and coordinating control projects 

with parks. 

The battle to manage the widely recognized and increasing problem of invasive 

species in our national parks has brought together a broad-based coalition of public 

and private agencies, citizens and organizations with the shared goal of protecting 

our national heritage. The Department’s commitment to take aggressive action to 

prevent and manage invasive species is evident by the support of programs such as 

the Natural Resource Challenge and the Cooperative Conservation Initiative. 

We applaud your efforts Mr. Chairman to bring recognition to this growing problem of invasive species on parklands across the Nation. This concludes my statement and I will be happy to answer any questions that you or members of the Committee may have.

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much for your testimony. Next 

will be Don Reeser. 

Don, I understand that you have just retired from the Park Service after 17 years of serving as superintendent at Haleakala National Park on Maui. I know you have worked long and hard on 

many issues around Haleakala, including air tour management and 

invasive species, where you’ve really made a difference. I greatly 

appreciate your taking the time to come to the hearing today to 

share your experiences, particularly with respect to invasive species. 

Congratulations, once again, on the road to your retirement, and 

thank you for coming here today. We look forward to your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF DONALD REESER, HALEAKALA NATIONAL 

PARK VOLUNTEER 

Mr. REESER. Thank you, Senator Akaka, for allowing me to come. 

For some reason, I don’t feel too retired, being here, but I served 

40 years for the National Park Service, 43 for the Federal Government, Muir Woods National Monument. I gave programs right here 

in 1968 and, later on, became chief of resources management, and 

then went over to Redwood National Park. I was chief of resources 

management in rehabilitation, then 17 years, as you say, at 

Haleakala. 

Now, when I transferred to Hawaii Volcanoes in 1968, there was 

concern by biologists for the impacts of two native biological resources by the thousands of feral goats and pigs that roamed the 

park. However, there was little support by the public or higher officials at that time for necessary action. Programs to control these 

animals by the National Park Service were largely perfunctory. 

By documenting feral animal impacts and demonstrating success 

in excluding feral animals from large fenced areas, public percepVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:57 Dec 15, 2005 Jkt 109209 PO 24981 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 P:\DOCS\24981.TXT SENERGY2 PsN: PAULM
9

tions and understanding gradually changed through the years. Discredited was the notion that control of feral animals was enough 

to save native species. Finally acknowledged was the reality that 

total exclusion of feral animals is necessary to achieve native ecosystem preservation and restoration. 

In 1963, the Leopold Report on Wildlife Management, a blue-ribbon committee, made recommendations to the National Park Service on how to manage resources. And one sentence in there, to me, 

really summed up what the policy was to be pursued, and that is, 

I quote, ‘‘A visitor who climbs a mountain in Hawaii ought to see 

the money trees and silverswords, not goats.’’

Since the early 1970’s, the National Park Service has been a 

leader in ecosystem preservation. Feral animals in Hawaii national 

parks are being effectively excluded by internal and boundary 

fences. Park interpretive programs emphasize ecosystem preservation and the problems associated with invasive species. Resource 

management divisions, with supporting U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division research assistance, have been established and dedicated to ecosystem preservation and restoration. Active involvement in watershed partnerships is ongoing and crucial 

in addressing invasive issues adjacent to park boundaries. An Exotic Plant Management Team is assigned to a host park, 

Haleakala, to help respond to the needs of several parks in Hawaii. 

Park ecosystem preservation has come a long way since the 

1970’s in dealing with invasive species. We had a full plate of nonnatives to deal with, including rats, mongooses, faya tree, kahili 

ginger, to name a few. However, today we have new invasive species such as Coqui frogs, Miconia and leaf hoppers, and, now, if 

you’ve been reading the news, we’ve got a wiliwili wasp we weren’t 

even thinking about just 3 days ago, and now it’s here and there’s 

a possibility of wiping out the wiliwili trees. While resource management worked on programs to deal with existing pests, new ones 

were arriving on the scene. Park managers now fear that the 

brown tree snake and red fire ant will soon be on the control list. 

Airports and harbors are the obvious pathways for the new arrivals that threaten public health, agricultural crops, and native ecosystems. On Maui, the National Park Service has played a 

proactive role in trying to effect change in the infrastructure and 

the scope of interdiction activities at Kahului Airport. National 

Park Service challenges to the airport improvement environmental 

compliance documentation resulted in an alien species program requirement that was appended to the final record of decision. Risk 

assessments conducted by the Hawaii Department of Agriculture 

confirmed the validity of park concerns. 

Nevertheless, after nearly a decade of meetings and discussion 

among key agencies, there remains substantial resistance or apathy for the implementation of effective and adequately staffed 

interdiction programs at Kahului Airport where implementation of 

an alien species action plan was mandated. Recent legislation sponsored by Congressman Ed Case, which would require the Secretary 

of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to expand Federal 

efforts to prevent the introduction in Hawaii of non-native plants, 

animals, and plant and animal diseases, if this is enacted, this may 

help achieve the needed changes at the airports and harbors. 

10

Harbors as an avenue for invasive species have not received the 

attention they deserve because they are longstanding existing operations. However, in the last year, a proposal for Superferries operating between islands has raised concern for accelerating the 

spread of invasive species between islands. The NPS testified before the Maui County Council that the enormous increase of loaded 

vehicles entering Maui would cause adverse impacts to park ecosystems. Many of these vehicles aboard the Superferries will be 

carrying invasive plant seeds such as Miconia, fountain grasses, insects, spreading them from sea level to 10,000 feet elevation. Probable impacts to a national park require analyses and mitigations 

under the National Environmental Protection Act. Hawaii Department of Transportation has declined to prepare an Environmental 

Impact Statement. 

National parks should be outstanding examples of ecosystem 

preservation and principal leaders in combating alien invasive species. Major challenges facing the National Park Service include: 

dealing more aggressively and effectively with established invasive 

species using traditional methods, as well as seeking and employing new biological controls; two, gaining clear authority for targeting certain invasive species outside park boundaries rather than 

waiting to fight them in the park; and three, preventing the establishment of new pest species in Hawaii. 

Additional funding for invasive control and ecosystem restoration 

programs is an obvious need. Eroding park bases from inflation 

and mandated programs have made it tough for park managers to 

keep adequate funding in resource protection programs. 

Special legislation that makes it easier for the National Park 

Service to assist adjacent park partners in attacking ecosystemchanging species such as Miconia is desperately needed. Guidelines 

for recreational fee demonstration program revenues received at 

entrance stations and from commercial operations at national 

parks need to be liberalized for funding serious invasive species 

programs inside and on adjacent partnership lands. 

And, finally, thank you, Senator Akaka. In my experience here 

for, I think, 27 years in Hawaii, I know that you have been very 

supportive of money for fencing and for alien species control, and 

the national parks are in far better shape today because of your vision and commitment to the preservation of native Hawaiian plants 

and animals. Thank you. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much for your testimony. I 

would like to ask questions of you, beginning with Dr. Soukup. 

How much did the National Park Service spend on invasive species in 2004? Two parts of the question. How much of that was 

spent, also, at park units in Hawaii? And what are your estimates 

for the current year, and do you have any estimate as to what percent of the need it addresses? 

Dr. SOUKUP. Well, I can tell you the numbers of the current expenditure insofar as we track them. There’s a lot of individual activity out at parks, and a lot of parks are spending portions of their 

base funding that we can’t track all that well, but of the funds that 

we know that are going directly and appear in line items that we 

can track, over $10 million is being spent just out of the challenge 

alone. That doesn’t include the park base increases. $10 million naVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:57 Dec 15, 2005 Jkt 109209 PO 24981 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 P:\DOCS\24981.TXT SENERGY2 PsN: PAULM
11

tionwide. In 2004, I think it was something like $5 million here in 

Hawaii, and $6 million in 2005 is estimated when the year is over 

that we will spend. I think that’s an underestimate, but it certainly, I think, reflects a very small proportion of what needs to be 

done to control what many people consider to be a biological wildfire. 

What we don’t see is the order of magnitude of effort available 

to us that you see for wildfires, for instance. I think we need the 

same kind of approach. And I don’t believe people are aware of the 

consequences as they are of fire, and I think we need to invest in 

making people more aware of that so that the funding, perhaps, 

will catch up with the need. 

Senator AKAKA. As we all know, funding is very important, and 

invasive species programs are extremely important to Hawaii. We 

know that you will keep that high in your mind as you think about 

funding. 

Dr. Soukup, what is the National Park Service’s highest priority 

for invasive species management overall, and what is its highest 

priority in Hawaii? 

Dr. SOUKUP. Well, one of the things that has to be done with the 

amount of funding that we can apply and the magnitude of the 

issue is we have to have a very methodical, science-based approach 

to ranking the different invasive species. As you know, some species are not invasive to the degree that others are. And it’s very 

important to be able to track and predict which ones have to be 

interdicted early. And that’s a real, I think, scientific challenge. 

We’re getting a tremendous amount of help from the USGS as 

well as our cooperative ecosystem studies units that are based at 

universities, in helping us target our funding and our plant management teams to the most aggressive and most, eventually, costly 

invasives. That, I think, is the best way we can go, and that will 

certainly, I think, have the biggest impact, that plus being able to 

partner with the States and local organizations. 

In terms of the highest priority right now, I have my own personal list. It’s the old world climbing vine in the Everglades. I will 

maybe ask Dr. Loope to talk about what he thinks is the most aggressive threat here in the islands. 

Senator AKAKA. I know you have what you call Exotic Plant 

Management Teams working in the National Park Service, and 

they are working to combat invasive species. Have these teams 

been successful? And what have they accomplished in Hawaii? 

What do you see as the future of this program? 

Dr. SOUKUP. This program is only several years old, but we believe they have already demonstrated their utility, not only in aggressively attacking priority species; I think we’ve eliminated 12 

species from all parks nationwide, already completely to a maintenance level. 

We are, I think, going to find increased support from the Department and from other agencies. There are other agencies that are 

now fielding similar teams, and we’re helping train those teams. So 

we think the idea is a good one. It’s certainly flexible. It attracts 

partners. We have partners at all levels of government and individuals who contribute their money and their time. So we think that 

12

the idea is a good concept and it’s certainly going to be, I hope, supported in the future. 

The 2007 budget proposal, I think, will be a very positive one for 

us. I don’t have a lot of information with me—I can provide it for 

the record—of the accomplishments here in the Hawaiian Islands. 

I don’t know if the panel would like to speak to that or not, but 

I know there’s been great progress in dealing with Miconia, for instance, and I’m sure other species are also targeted. 

Senator AKAKA. I know the National Park Service has been 

working diligently in the battle against invasive species. My final 

question to you is what do you consider the greatest success story 

for the National Park Service in the battle of invasive species? 

Dr. SOUKUP. I believe that I have a list—I personally like the 

preclusion of the zebra mussel from the St. Croix National Scenic 

Riverway. The park, on its own, with its own finances, acted very 

quickly to inspect recreational boats and remove and restrict recreational access whenever there was a threat from the spread of 

the zebra mussel. I think that’s a very good example. There were 

communities of endemic mussels in that river that would have been 

wiped out very quickly had they not taken appropriate action very, 

very quickly. And they’ve been very successful. 

Removal of the burro from the Grand Canyon would be another, 

as would Melaleuca removal from Big Cypress National Preserve in 

Hawaii. We removed 100,000 acres of a very aggressive plant and 

had a ribbon-cutting as we hacked the last one down, I think, 2 

years ago. I think there are lots of successes out there. Another example would be removing the African oryx from the White Sands 

National Monument. 4,000 white African oryx were removed. The 

rat removal from the Channel Islands has brought the birds back. 

We have a ton of success stories, and I think they prove that 

with a little bit of resources, we can take on a lot of the worst problems. And I think with concerted resources and a cooperative approach, I think we can do a lot more. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you for your testimony. 

Mr. Reeser, you’ve said that guidelines for the use of park fee 

revenues need to be liberalized to fund serious invasive species 

problems. Can you explain what are the limitations of the use of 

park fee revenues and what specific new authority is needed? 

Mr. REESER. Well, the fee demonstration program is limited to 

projects on Federal lands. When we started collecting fees at 

Kipahulu, we had plans to use the revenues there, which would 

have been a couple million dollars a year, which were actually—

that we hoped to have used that for Miconia, to prevent it from getting in the park, but after a lot of discussions with solicitors and 

higher officials, the phrase in the law that says ‘‘only on Federal 

lands’’ pretty much did away with that idea. 

If we would have been able to use that money, I think we’d be 

a lot further along right now with Miconia than we are now. But 

those are the restrictions, and I know there is some legislation that 

you are working on under certain conditions that partners could receive some Federal funding to work on aliens that jeopardize park 

resources. 

Senator AKAKA. I’m glad you mentioned what you did. I think my 

bill will be able to help with that when it’s passed. 

13

Mr. Reeser, let me ask you a similar question to one that I asked 

Dr. Soukup. What do you consider your biggest—biggest—success 

at Haleakala in managing—two things—in managing the invasive 

species, and what is the biggest remaining challenge? 

Mr. REESER. Well, on Haleakala, the greatest success was building those incredibly difficult fences along the crater walls there to 

exclude the goats. And there’s tremendous recovery taking place in 

the crater, silverswords and other species, for a decade now or 

more. And Kipahulu Valley, putting across fences in Kipahulu Valley, the boundary fences and getting rid of the pigs. There have 

been documented changes there that are quite significant. 

Our biggest challenge right now is how to deal with the greatest 

threat to the park, and that’s that Miconia that we’ve been working 

with the East Hawaii Partnership, with the Maui Invasive Species 

Committee, and others to try to facilitate, but that is the biggest 

threat. That could undo all the good work we’ve done in Kipahulu 

Valley up to this point, and that’s one of the richest areas left in 

the State. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much. 

Dr. Loope, thank you for agreeing to come and provide comments 

today. We have you on the witness list as a resource person, and 

I’d like to ask you a few questions about invasive species since you 

have worked for both the National Park Service and the U.S. Geological Survey. 

Dr. Loope, from your perspective and experience, what are some 

of the invasions that pose the worst threats to the parks in Hawaii, 

how did these invaders get to Hawaii in the first place, and what 

damage do they do? Finally, what measures are needed to prevent 

more of the same coming to Hawaii? 

Dr. LOOPE. That’s a pretty demanding question to answer, you 

know, to capsulize right, but I’ll do my best. 

I guess I really agree with Don Reeser’s mention of the fact that 

thinking of Haleakala National Park, that Miconia is just an overwhelming threat looming out there, and I think that if—there 

might be a good solution if the Park Service can find a way to use 

funding outside the park and to be able to use entrance fee money. 

So that’s one thing. 

There are problems that money can actually solve. Okay? But another type of problem—another type of invasive species that I really get discouraged about, actually Mike Soukup mentioned, the 

’Ohi’a rust. And, usually, we think—I think you mentioned in your 

introduction that invasive species are a threat to Hawaii’s endangered species. Well, unfortunately, that’s an understatement. Look 

outside at the ’Ohi’a trees right around here. Hawaii isn’t a basket 

case. We have pretty intact ecosystems in these national parks. 

Unfortunately, this ’Ohi’a rust, there’s almost nothing we can do 

about it, since it’s already been introduced. Possibly a species like 

this could wipe out all of our ’Ohi’a trees. That sounds like an exaggeration, and I wouldn’t have said it even last week, except there’s 

a lot in the press on Maui about this new insect—it’s a gallwasp. 

It came to us from Asia, and it’s basically killing all of our native 

wiliwili trees, endemic species. And like Geraldine over at Hula 

Hanua, she’s got wiliwili trees, right? I mean, this snuck up on us. 

It was recorded first on Oahu in April. And all of a sudden—we 

14

find out that it’s killing all the wiliwili trees on Oahu, and all of 

a sudden it’s on all the other islands. It was found at Kona Airport 

on the 21st of July, Kauai a few days later, and now Maui, and we 

realize it’s probably been on Maui for a month. We really want to 

do something about it, but it’s just too late. And so I guess I would 

just like to say that we have to find a way to stop these new invasions from coming in. And I’m sad to say just those two species, 

one—the gallwasp certainly came from the direction of Asia. It was 

probably originally native to Africa. Came to us from Asia. And, actually, there was no chance, with the quarantine system that we 

have, of stopping something like that. 

And the same thing about the ’Ohi’a rust. It possibly came from 

Florida, but more likely Colombia or Venezuela, in nursery material. I think the ’Ohi’a rust came in on a host plant. And so it’s 

kind of unclear. You’ll hear more in the testimony later on that it’s, 

understandably, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s quarantine 

system that protects our borders. The Department of Homeland Security, they have priorities that are very understandable—security, 

right?—in protecting agriculture. And so it seems that the ’Ohi’a 

trees and wiliwili are not something that’s focused on. I would just 

think that maybe you might want to look into this more, because 

if we don’t, we’re finding out what’s going to happen. On Maui 

we’re losing all our wiliwili trees. Unfortunately, Geraldine is going 

to lose hers, too, probably. I just hope that the ’Ohi’a trees around 

here don’t succumb to this strain of rust. If they don’t, we’d better 

try doubly hard to keep out future strains. 

Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak. I just think 

that’s we’re going to lose unless we can keep new invasions out at 

least better than we are now. 

Senator AKAKA. Dr. Loope, this has been one of our huge problems, and that is to prevent these invasive species from coming in 

to Hawaii. Do you have any ideas? You mentioned the Department 

of Agriculture in checking whatever comes in with people who come 

to the islands. Do you have any specific measures in mind that we 

might be able to use to prevent further invasive species from coming in to Hawaii? 

Dr. LOOPE. Well, it’s hard to make specific recommendations 

without upsetting somebody, but I guess I’ll have to say it because 

you asked me. It just seems like it’s the plant trade. If we looked 

very carefully at the plants that are allowed to come in to Hawaii 

from both the east and from the west. I am not saying cut it off. 

The costs aren’t just costs to agriculture and horticulture when the 

pests get in. They’re a tremendous cost for national resources and 

specifically for national parks. 

I think looking at it in terms of economics is fine, but we can’t 

look at it just as protecting national security and agriculture. We’ve 

got to think about—in other words, basically, it’s what’s allowed to 

be traded in this world of free trade. That’s just my suggestion. 

Senator AKAKA. Well, I thank you very much for your responses. 

I want to thank the first panel of witnesses very much. We look 

forward to your responses as to how we can help the problem of 

invasive species, and hopefully the bills that we are crafting and 

proposing will make a difference, and your testimony will help us 

do that. So thank you very much to the first panel. 

15

As you leave, Mike, I want to say aloha to you. I know you have 

to catch a plane. And thank you very much for being here. 

Dr. SOUKUP. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator AKAKA. I would like to call the next panel. Mr. Mark 

Fox, director of external affairs, Nature Conservancy of Hawaii; 

also Dr.. Mindy Wilkinson, invasive species coordinator, Division of 

Forestry and Wildlife; and Dr. Neil Reimer, branch chief, Plant 

Quarantine, Hawaii Department of Agriculture. 

Many of you don’t know this, but I’ve known Mark for a few 

years. Mark, it’s good to see you again here in Hawaii. 

And I would like to express my great appreciation for all the 

wonderful work that the Nature Conservancy has done in Hawaii 

for conservation, endangered species, and battling invasive species 

to help preserve our native habitat. So why don’t you proceed with 

your testimony, Mark. 

STATEMENT OF MARK R. FOX, DIRECTOR OF EXTERNAL 

AFFAIRS, THE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF HAWAII 

Mr. FOX. Thank you, Senator. It’s very good to see you as well. 

And thank you, also, for hosting this important hearing. 

The Nature Conservancy’s experience as a land manager in Hawaii for the last 25 years has shown us that the single greatest 

threat to the survival of Hawaii’s natural environment is the damage done by non-native, invasive species. Indeed, more than 90 percent of our work in the field is directly connected to dealing with 

invasive species. 

In that regard, we greatly appreciate your sponsorship of important bills moving us in the right direction on this issue: The Natural Resource Protection Cooperative Agreement, the Public Land 

Protection and Conservation Act, and also your sponsorship of the 

very comprehensive National Aquatic Invasive Species Act. All of 

those measures—and I’m going to just briefly mention them because we support them so much. I just want you to know that we 

appreciate them but don’t mean to diminish their importance by 

not going into depth. You’ve got our full support on those, and we 

can’t thank you enough for your sponsorship of those measures. 

I would like to turn to some things that the previous panel was 

talking about and add a little bit to that, and that’s the area of prevention. And we all know, and it’s been proven, that the best way 

to deal with invasive species is to prevent their introduction in the 

first place. And this issue—it’s not directly within the jurisdiction, 

necessarily, of the subcommittee, but it’s an area of critical importance. And as Don Reeser mentioned, as a direct result of National 

Park Service leadership, the model for prevention is beginning to 

be realized at Kahului Airport on Maui. That important progress 

that’s going on there traces back to Don Reeser’s insistence on protecting against new pest introductions that might result from, at 

that time, a proposed runway extension on Maui. 

The end result of Don’s leadership, and much collaboration between Federal and State agencies, are that we’re now having some 

more inspectors placed at Kahului International Airport, and 

there’s plans to construct a modern and enclosed inspection facility 

at Kahului Airport. You can imagine now, when agricultural inspection is done on Maui, when you open a container, and how 

16

windy it is there, once you open the doors of that container, that 

stuff is scattered to the wind. So soon, hopefully, we’ll have a new 

inspection facility. But all of that is a direct result of national park 

leadership not only recognizing the need to protect the resources of 

Haleakala there, but natural landscapes and the economy of Maui 

County. 

But even with the progress at Kahului, there are formidable 

challenges to developing a truly effective prevention system. This 

goes right up to and includes the U.S. Constitution and the free 

market principles this Nation was founded upon. For centuries, 

this country has promoted the important notions of free trade and 

open borders to commence. 

The Constitution’s Commerce and Supremacy Clauses, together 

with the specific preemption provisions of the Federal Plant Protection Act, are interpreted to prevent States from being more restrictive than the Federal Government in regulating the movement of 

plants and plant products in interstate and foreign commerce. So 

the State of Hawaii runs directly into this Federal preemption if 

it wishes to strengthen its statutes regarding plants or plant pests 

or implement stricter quarantine regulations in order to protect the 

islands from invasive species. The only available choice for the 

State of Hawaii is a long and laborious process of securing exemptions on a species-by-species basis from the Secretary of Agriculture. 

Now, to begin to try to address this problem, the Hawaii Invasive 

Species Prevention Act, or H.R. 3468, has been introduced in the 

House. The bill would establish an expedited review process for the 

State of Hawaii to impose greater restrictions on the movement of 

invasive species, it would mandate a Federal quarantine to protect 

Hawaii from new introductions of pests, and it would allow for the 

Federal enforcement of State quarantine laws. So we’re hopeful, 

and I’ve talked to your staff a little bit about this bill, that you’ll 

have an opportunity to consider and potentially introduce a Senate 

companion measure. 

Last, I would like to make a few comments on the threat of the 

brown tree snake. The subject came up on the earlier panel as well. 

Current and planned expansion of military activities on Guam is 

putting enormous pressure on military facilities there, and as a result, it’s putting enormous pressure on the U.S. Department of Ag 

Wildlife Services personnel that have to do all the inspections. 

They’re really being pushed to the brink. They’re in substandard 

facilities there, they have limited financial resources, and now, 

with all the cargo moving in and out of Guam, things are leaving 

uninspected daily from Guam for brown tree snakes. As a matter 

of fact, over 300,000 pounds of cargo left Guam uninspected in the 

last 2 weeks of June. 

The 2003 reauthorization of the Federal Sikes Act required that 

the Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan for Anderson 

Air Force Base include invasive species considerations. We hope 

that the Armed Services Committee can review the progress on 

that INRMP and consider applying that kind of assistance to 

INRMPs across Defense Department activities. It’s really important, with the Defense Department movement of cargo, that 

invasive species mitigation be considered, and we’re hopeful someVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:57 Dec 15, 2005 Jkt 109209 PO 24981 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 P:\DOCS\24981.TXT SENERGY2 PsN: PAULM
17

thing like this can be taken up by the Armed Services Committee 

and your Readiness and Management Support Subcommittee. 

With that, I’ll close my remarks and thank you again for this opportunity. I really, really appreciate your leadership on this issue. 

I can’t thank you enough. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Fox follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARK R. FOX, DIRECTOR OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, THE NATURE CONSERVANCY, HAWAI’I PROGRAM

INTRODUCTION

Senator Akaka, thank you for hosting this hearing and for the opportunity to testify on invasive species issues and legislative solutions to this serious threat. My 

name is Mark Fox, and I am the Director of External Affairs for The Nature Conservancy of Hawai’i. 

The mission of The Nature Conservancy is to preserve the plants, animals and 

natural communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the 

lands and waters they need to survive. With the support of approximately 1 million 

members, The Nature Conservancy has protected more than 120 million acres and 

5,000 river miles around the world. 

The Hawaii Chapter of the Conservancy has been in operation for 25 years and 

we currently manage a network of 12 preserves encompassing about 32,000 acres 

across the main Hawaiian islands. In addition to our core field work on our own 

preserves, we work with public and private colleagues throughout the state to organize and operate partnership entities that help protect and manage the islands’ 

globally unique, but extremely fragile natural resources. 

Examples of these partnerships include the five Island Invasive Species Committees that you hear a lot about today, and nine watershed partnerships around the 

islands that are managing nearly 1 million acres of Hawaii’s most important forested watersheds. Another example of such collaboration can now be enjoyed here 

at Hawai’i Volcanoes National Park. With leadership from the entire Hawaii Congressional delegation, we acquired and transferred to the Park Service the 115,000-

acre Kahuku Ranch. That single transaction, valued at $22,000,000 and completed 

in 2004, expanded the Park’s land ownership by one-half and is the largest single 

conservation land acquisition in the history of the State. 

BACKGROUND ON INVASIVE SPECIES

Our organization’s experience over the last quarter century demonstrates that the 

single greatest threat to the survival of Hawaii’s natural environment is the damage 

done by non-native, invasive species. Indeed, more than 90% of our field work and 

that of our conservation partners in Hawai’i is directed to preventing, detecting, and 

controlling invasive species, both plants and animals, that alter and ultimately devastate the islands’ natural environment. 

As you know, however, this is not just an environmental problem. Under unfortunate circumstances, we are finding strong allies across a wide variety of sectors including the visitor industry, health care, agriculture, and real estate as we all try 

to figure out how to deal with pests ranging from alien algae that blanket coral 

reefs, mosquito borne diseases, fire ants and stinging caterpillars, forest-choking 

weeds, ear-splitting coqui frogs, and costly crop diseases. 

We have been working hard over many years to physically control invasive species 

once they have arrived and become established. However, it is only in the last 10 

years that we have undertaken an organized effort in Hawai’i to affect public policy 

with respect to invasive species. Our work at the county, state and federal levels 

includes efforts to enhance recognition of the ecological, economic, health, and lifestyle threats from invasive species, to secure more funding to address these threats, 

and to support improved government policy in this area. 

INTERIOR DEPARTMENT LEGISLATION

We appreciate the leadership of Senator Akaka and Senator Wyden in sponsoring 

important bills that move us in the right direction of addressing pressing invasive 

species policy needs. The Natural Resource Protection Cooperative Agreement Act 

(S. 1288) will help with a very practical problem that has challenged the National 

Park Service. This important legislation addresses the fact that no authority now 

exists to allow a park to expend resources or enter into partnerships to control imminent invasive species threats outside park boundaries. The provisions of S. 1288 

18

would simply and effectively resolve this problem, as well as provide additional authority for the Park Service to enter into collaborative relationships that will benefit 

park resources. We trust the Administration will support this legislative version of 

the principles underlying the President’s Executive Order on Cooperative Conservation. 

The Park Service has the expertise to provide significant national leadership in 

this area. For example, using the teams that fight wildfires as a model, the National 

Park Service established Exotic Plant Management Teams (EPMT) across the country to serve as a highly-trained, mobile strike force that now protects hundreds of 

National Parks from the threat of invasive plants. Thanks to this program, the Pacific Islands EPMT proactively manages aggressive weeds in all the national parks 

in Hawai’i, protecting rare native communities from invasion. 

We also appreciate your planned reintroduction of the Public Land Protection and 

Conservation Act (S. 2598, 108th Cong.). This measure creates an excellent framework of federal granting authority to assist states with assessment and rapid response to invasive species threats, and to foster partnerships to control pests on and 

adjacent to Interior and Forest Service lands. This bill would provide an important 

additional source of revenue to leverage existing state and local funding for invasive 

species, including funding for rapid response programs to eradicate incipient invasions before they become widely established. Together with other members of the 

National Environmental Coalition on Invasive Species, the Conservancy endorses 

this legislation and looks forward to working with you to gain passage of this bill. 

PREVENTION AND QUARANTINE

We can and will spend vast amounts of time and money battling pests that become established in Hawai’i and elsewhere in the United States. However, it is a 

documented fact that the most effective, especially cost effective, way to deal with 

invasive species is to prevent their introduction in the first place. 

Legislation designed, in part, to prevent the further introduction of aquatic 

invasive species to the United States, has already been introduced in both the 

House and Senate (S. 770 and H.R. 1591/1592). The Conservancy supports the National Aquatic Invasive Species Act (NAISA), which is a comprehensive legislative 

approach to the threat of aquatic invasive species. This bill will cover all waters of 

the U.S., including marine and coastal waters, as well as inland lakes and streams. 

The provisions providing for the pre-screening of intentional introductions and the 

establishment of an early warning system coupled with rapid response capability 

are important new authorities that would protect all of our nation’s aquatic resources, whether Great Lake, trout stream, bayou, or coral reef 

The need for NAISA is demonstrated by existing invasions of national parks. For 

example, the New Zealand mud snail was accidentally introduced into Yellowstone 

National Park by recreational fishermen. This tiny snail is now alarmingly abundant and could prove to have major effects on some of the most pristine streams 

in the country. Likewise, the hitchhiking zebra mussel has spread to Wisconsin and 

is now smothering rare and endangered native mussels in the NPS administered St. 

Croix National Scenic Riverway. 

Another major threat to the resources of many National Parks is the existing and 

potential effects of introduced forest insects and diseases. The forests of such eastern parks as Great Smoky Mountains National Park and Shenandoah National 

Park no longer represent the primeval forest of the Appalachians. The most noticeable missing tree is the American chestnut, which was virtually eradicated during 

the early 1900s by the introduced chestnut blight. Other trees in the Appalachians 

have succumbed to and are threatened by a succession of invasions. Increasing attention is currently focused on the hemlock woolly adelgid pest, which is killing the 

towering hemlocks that form unique ecosystems of great beauty and biological importance. This year, the U.S. Forest Service’s Forest Health Management program 

will fund more than $350,000 to map and develop a response to this pest in Great 

Smoky and Shenandoah National Parks, the Blue Ridge Parkway, and several 

smaller historic park units. The response to this alien invader will probably rely 

largely on biological control and attempts to breed resistant trees. 

Great Smoky Mountains National Park might soon face an even greater menace, 

the sudden oak death pathogen. This plant disease, currently found in California 

where it is killing oaks and infesting other trees and plants in Redwoods National 

Park and Point Reyes National Seashore, can easily be spread by the movement of 

nursery stock. If the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Protection Service (APHIS) 

fails to prevent such transmission, sudden oak death could infect a high proportion 

of the oak trees in Great Smoky Mountains and other parks, as well as the rhododendron shrubs that contribute so much to spring floral displays. 

19

In addition, white pine blister rust is killing ninety percent or more of high-elevation five-needle pines in Glacier, Yellowstone, and Crater Lake National parks. 

The disease was recently found in the mountains above Great Sand Dunes National 

Park. As the disease continues to spread in the Rockies, it will threaten pines in 

Rocky Mountain and Great Basin National parks. 

As noted above, much of the National Park Service’ current effort to combat introduced forest insects and pathogens is funded through the USDA Forest Service Forest Health Management Program. Chairman Charles Taylor of the House Interior 

Appropriations Subcommittee has provided key Congressional leadership to increase 

funding for this program. However, the agency responsible for preventing introductions of forest pests and eradicating those that evade border controls is USDA 

APHIS. Unfortunately, APHIS has not received adequate funding to carry out effective eradication programs targeting even the pests which pose the greatest risk, 

such as the emerald ash borer and Asian longhorned beetle. Congress and the governors of affected states have urged the Administration to provide emergency funds 

from the Commodity Credit Corporation, but the Administration has so far rejected 

such requests. 

Turning more directly to the issue of prevention and the threat of new pest introductions in Hawai’i, I would like to offer some specific comments on inspection and 

quarantine activities at ports of entry. While this may not be directly within the 

jurisdiction of this subcommittee, it is an area of critical importance to any entity 

trying to manage invasive species threats. 

As a direct result of National Park Service leadership, a model for prevention is 

being realized on the island of Maui where we are all benefiting from improved understanding of pest risks and enhanced quarantine and inspection capacity at 

Kahului International Airport. These enhancements include additional inspectors 

and a modern and secure inspection facility that will soon be constructed at the airport. 

This process, which began with a proposed runway extension, was not easy for 

anyone involved particularly on an island that relies heavily on visitor and cargo 

arrivals to support its economy. However, the model now being established at 

Kahului airport is the product of hard work and understanding by a number of individuals and agencies like the National Park Service, the Federal Aviation Administration, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, the Hawaii Department of Transportation 

Airports Division, the Hawaii Department of Agriculture, and others. 

The important progress at Kahului airport traces back to Haleakala National 

Park leadership, particularly Superintendent Don Reeser who is here today, that insisted on the importance of protecting against new pest introductions. This position 

by the Park Service was primarily for the protection of the globally unique resources 

at Haleakala National Park, but it also was based in the much broader appreciation 

of the role of natural landscapes on Maui and across the island chain. After all, Hawaii’s natural environment is what drives our visitor economy, provides the yearround climate for our diversified agriculture industry, delivers the most basic necessities like clean fresh water from healthy forested watersheds, and allows us the 

lifestyle that all residents enjoy. 

It is also worth noting that the Park Service in Hawai’i and Channels Island National Park has been a leader in protecting globally significant resources from feral 

animals, including pigs, goats and sheep. 

Federal Preemption 

Even with this spirit of collaboration and example of success at Kahului airport, 

there are formidable challenges to developing a truly effective prevention system—

right up to and including the United State Constitution and the free market principles this nation is founded upon. For centuries this country has promoted the important notions of free trade and open boarders to commerce. 

The Constitution’s Commerce Clause (Art I., Sec. 8, Clause 3) and Supremacy 

Clause (Art VI, Clause 2) set that stage by giving Congress the authority to regulate 

commerce with other nations and between the states, and confirming that federal 

law is the supreme law of the land. In the area of pest prevention, the federal Plant 

Protection Act takes it a step further by specifically preempting states from being 

more restrictive than the federal government in regulating the movement of plants 

and plant products. (7 U.S.C. § 7756) The federal government is not so preemptive 

with respect to regulating the movement of animals, both terrestrial and aquatic. 

The differences in Hawai’i state law regarding the introduction of plants and nondomestic animals (Hawai’i Revised Statutes §§ 150A-6.1 and -6.2) directly reflect the 

preference for movement of plants through federal preemption of state regulatory 

regimes. Basically, Hawaii uses a black list (noxious weed list) approach to plants, 

and a white list approach to animals. What this means is that virtually all plants 

20

are allowed to be introduced to Hawai’i unless on a very short noxious weed list (approximately 80 identified plants). Conversely, no non-domestic animals are allowed 

entry into the state unless on one of two short approved lists. 

The State of Hawai’i runs directly into federal preemption if it wishes to strengthen its statutes regarding plants or implement stricter state quarantine regulations. 

The only available choice is a long and laborious process of securing approval for 

heightened restrictions on a species-by-species basis from the Secretary of Agriculture. (7 U.S.C. § 7756(b)(2)(B)) 

With this problem in mind and recognizing Hawaii’s unique risk from invasive 

species, a bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives that would provide Hawai’i with additional federal support on incoming quarantine inspections 

and establish an expedited process for the State to implement regulations to protect 

itself from pest threats. In particular, H. R. 3468, the Hawaii Invasive Species Prevention Act, would:

• Mandate federal quarantine protection for the State of Hawai’i to prevent the 

introduction of invasive species, including a system of post-arrival protocols for 

all passengers and cargo; 

• Allow for federal enforcement of State quarantine laws; 

• Establish an expedited review process for the State of Hawai’i to impose restrictions on the movement of invasive species or diseases that are in addition to 

federal restrictions; and 

• Allow the State of Hawai’i to impose limited emergency restrictions upon the 

introduction or movement of a pest or disease.

We hope you will review this bill and consider introducing a companion measure 

in the Senate. 

Brown Tree Snakes and the Department of Defense 

The build up of U.S. military activities in the global war on terrorism has resulted 

in unprecedented growth and movement of military personnel and cargo at many 

installations in the United States and abroad. Current and planned expansion of 

military facilities on Guam are putting enormous pressure on military facilities 

there and, as a result, on U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services personnel tasked with inspecting the vast amounts of cargo leaving Guam. Available 

funding from the Departments of Defense, Interior and Agriculture for Wildlife 

Service’s inspection operations has been level for about a decade and has, therefore, 

not kept pace with the military’s massive operational expansion on Guam and elsewhere in the Pacific. Additionally, Wildlife Services personnel, equipment and canines are being housed in substandard facilities, if not crowded off Anderson Air 

Force Base altogether, and cargo is regularly leaving Guam without any inspection. 

In the last two weeks of June alone:

• 7 military aircraft left Guam uninspected by Wildlife Services personnel. 

• These aircraft contained 131 military household goods packouts. 

• These packouts included 312,780 lbs. of cargo. 

• This cargo was bound for locations throughout the Pacific, the U.S. mainland, 

and Europe. 

• Final destinations included temperate locations such as Hawaii, American 

Samoa, Okinawa, Puerto Rico, California, Texas, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Arkansas, South Carolina, and Louisiana where brown tree snakes could survive 

year-round and pose significant ecological, economic and human health threats. 

(Source: USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services, Guam)

The 2003 reauthorization of the federal Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 670a-670f) included a pilot program requiring that the Integrated Natural Resource Management 

Plan (INRMP) for Anderson Air Force Base on Guam contain specific elements on 

invasive species. We recommend a review of this pilot test, including consideration 

that it be applied to all Defense Department INRMPs through either further amendment to the Sikes Act or the annual Defense Authorization Act. 

We also recommend specific requirements concerning not only the impact of 

invasive species to natural resources on military bases, but also the threats posed 

to outside locations as the result of exports of pests in military transport. Further, 

it is important that invasive species mitigation, especially regarding the movement 

of pests in military transport, become an integral component of the budgeting for 

base operations and military readiness. Important language that would have required this type of consideration was stricken from the Brown Tree Snake Control 

and Eradication Act of 2004 before it passed the Congress last year. 

21

CONCLUSION

Thank you again for this opportunity to offer The Nature Conservancy’s comments 

on the critical issues related to invasive species policy. The global economy and our 

ability to quickly and efficiently move people and goods around the globe benefit all 

of us. However, these same modern advancements are exponentially elevating the 

potentially catastrophic threats of invasive pests and diseases. We greatly appreciate your recognition of this serious issue and your willingness to take a leadership 

role in enhancing federal policies and resources to address this problem.

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much. I’m glad you mentioned 

others. We are certainly in need of partnerships in doing this, and 

the Armed Services might be able to be primed to help in this respect. Thank you for mentioning that. 

But to begin with, let me give high compliments to Governor 

Lingle and our chairperson, Mr. Peter Young, and to Mr. Paul 

Conry, the head of the Department of Forestry and Wildlife, when 

it comes to invasive species. 

The State of Hawaii, along with the county Invasive Species 

Committees, are head and shoulders above most other States in the 

acknowledgement of and planning for the arrival of invasive species. I am proud of our State’s efforts, and I’m working with them 

to increase the Federal side of the equation by getting more funding to States and local groups to fight invasives. So I’m glad to 

have you all here with us and to have the testimony of Dr. Mindy 

Wilkinson. 

STATEMENT OF DR. MINDY WILKINSON, INVASIVE SPECIES 

COORDINATOR, HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES, DIVISION OF FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE 

Dr. WILKINSON. Thank you, Senator. I’m very happy to be here. 

I again appreciate your support very much, and aloha kakou to the 

staff that are here today. We appreciate your traveling so far. 

I have been asked to discuss legislation and legislative solutions 

to invasive species, but as you point out, to discuss how Hawaii can 

be a model for additional legislation. I’m going to do this by describing the partnerships, collaborations, and people who have put 

lifetimes of hard work into preserving what we see around us 

today. These partnerships and innovations in management developed here in Hawaii I think really do serve as good models for national programs. 

One of the key things that is different about Hawaii is that we 

have a clear border, and because of this, we can truly show what 

can be accomplished with a comprehensive effort to control invasive 

species. And we recognize that, for many invasive species, concerns 

waiting to start managing them until they are within a management unit like a national park or have crossed a regional boundary 

is not sufficient, just as, right now, spread of America faya is proving extremely difficult to check in the park. 

The most effective option for avoiding the further degradation of 

ecosystems by invasive species is prevention followed by trying to 

find them early, early detection and then rapid response, having 

the capacity to respond quickly, no matter whose land the invasive 

species is found on. It’s very important not to risk losing another 

acre, another native plant, another bird to brown tree snakes, red 

imported fire ants, or the next pest that’s lurking around the corner. Protecting Hawaii from invasive species by working together 

22

to improve prevention and quarantine networks and preventing the 

establishment of invasive species are both key, and we really appreciate your support of partnerships that have tried to accomplish 

that. 

As you point out, the State of Hawaii is committed to invasive 

species management through the stewardship of our own lands, 

which includes the 102-year-old forest reserve system and through 

our partnerships, including the Invasive Species Committees, as 

you’ve mentioned, that manage newly established species—this is 

similar in concept to the Exotic Plant Management Teams except 

that our goal is statewide eradication of our target species—and to 

the watershed partnerships that allow neighboring landowners to 

collaborate to manage landscapes. The Olaa-Kilauea Partnership 

was mentioned earlier. 

In 2003, the State legislature created the Hawaii Invasive Species Council to provide cabinet-level leadership for this issue on the 

State of Hawaii, and subsequently the Governor assigned her key 

cabinet members to be a part of that council and dedicated $4 million in new funding to control invasive species and support partnership efforts throughout the State. This program has been in existence for 1 year now, and I’m happy to report that with this new 

funding and in cooperation with the counties and our Federal partners, we have carried out research at ports to identify the goods 

in vessels that pose the greatest risk of introducing new invasive 

species to the State of Hawaii. We’ve expanded our operations to 

control invasive species that threaten the environment, such as 

coqui frogs and Miconia. We’ve provided over $600,000 in grants for 

improved research and technology to control and prevent the introduction of invasive species, and we’ve created an integrated outreach network that links together groups such as public health, agriculture, and the environment that all have something in common. 

And that’s trying to slow the impact—or slow the introduction of 

invasive species and reduce the impact of those that have been established. 

The National Parks are what brought us here today, so I just 

want to say that they have contributed greatly to conservation in 

Hawaii and made strides—great strides—in the two aspects of 

invasive species management that provide the most significant 

long-term biological impact, both prevention and early response 

and control. 

We think that the National Resource Protection Cooperative 

Agreement, S. 1288, will build on the contributions that the national parks have made and allow cooperations that will continue 

to benefit both the resources of the national park and the State of 

Hawaii. Those of us that live and work in Hawaii appreciate the 

results of the conservation of the native ecosystems of our national 

parks. What we assume to be Conservation Management 101 was 

developed in many cases locally by managers such as current Hawaii Volcanoes National Park research manager Tim Tunison who’s 

here today, who caused us to focus, instead of on the core of a population of weeds, on the outlying populations and develop a strategy that’s made us more effective statewide, and also to Don 

Reeser, whose contributions have been noted about Kahului AirVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:57 Dec 15, 2005 Jkt 109209 PO 24981 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 P:\DOCS\24981.TXT SENERGY2 PsN: PAULM
23

port. We’re also concerned about brown tree snakes and all of the 

other species that could come in. 

And between your initiative to fund conservation partnerships as 

well as supporting bills that strengthen our ability to keep out species that pose a great risk to Hawaii, we feel that we can continue 

to improve the outlook for Hawaii’s ecosystems and environment. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Wilkinson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. MINDY WILKINSON, INVASIVE SPECIES COORDINATOR, 

HAWAI’I DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES, DIVISION OF FORESTRY

AND WILDLIFE

INTRODUCTION

Aloha Senator Akaka. Thank you for traveling here to Hawai’i Volcanoes National 

Park to experience our unique and diverse Hawaiian ecosystems. My name is Mindy 

Wilkinson and I am the Invasive Species Coordinator for the Hawai’i Department 

of Land and Natural Resources. Finding solutions to the impacts caused by invasive 

species is one of the key priorities of our Department. 

While I’ve been asked to discuss legislation and legislative solutions with you 

today I will only be able to do this by describing the partnerships, collaborations 

and lifetimes of hard work that have gone into preserving what you see around you. 

The partnerships and innovations in management developed in Hawai’i serve as 

models for developing better legislative solutions to the problems caused by invasive 

species. 

Cooperating to control invasive species across landscapes has improved management of native ecosystems by including entire watersheds and allowing ecosystems 

to function instead of relying on constant mitigative measures to make up for the 

loss of key pieces of habitat. For many invasive species concerns, waiting to initiate 

management until they are on your property or have crossed a regional boundary 

is not sufficient. The most effective option for avoiding degradation of ecosystems 

by invasive species is prevention followed by early detection and rapid response to 

these species, no matter who’s land the species is found on. It is important to not 

risk loosing another acre, another host plant or native bird to Brown Treesnakes, 

Red Imported Fire Ants or the next threat around the corner. Protecting Hawai’i 

from invasive species by working together to improve our prevention and quarantine 

network and preventing the establishment of invasive species and eradicate incipient populations of invasive species is key to preserving our ecosystems. 

The State of Hawai’i is committed to invasive species management through the 

stewardship of our own lands which includes the 102 year old forest reserve system 

and through partnerships including the Invasive Species Committees that manage 

newly established invasive species and Watershed Partnerships that allow neighboring landowners to collaborate to manage landscapes. In 2003 the Hawai’i State 

Legislature created the Hawai’i Invasive Species Council to provide Cabinet level 

leadership and the Governor subsequently asked key Cabinet members to participate as well as committing $4,000,000 in new state funding to improve programs 

devoted to invasive species prevention, early detection and rapid response, research 

and the application of new technology and public outreach. 

With the cooperation of the Counties, Federal partners and private groups we 

have:

• carried out research at our ports to identify the goods and vessels that pose the 

greatest risk of introducing invasive species, 

• expanded our operations to control invasive species that threaten the environment and economy as well as creating an innovative aquatic species response 

team that will help protect our vital reefs, 

• provided 17 research and technology grants totaling $600,000 to improve our 

ability to respond to invasive species, and 

• created an integrated invasive species outreach program to link together groups 

representing public health, agriculture, environment and tourism.

Our goal is to provide the commitment and matching funds to encourage increased participation by our partners. 

24

NATIONAL PARKS

The National Parks Service has contributed greatly to conservation in Hawai’i 

and has made great strides in the two aspects of invasive species management that 

provide the most significant long term biological impact, prevention and early detection and rapid response. The National Resources Protection Cooperative Agreement 

Act S. 1288 will build on the contributions that the National Parks have made and 

allow cooperation and partnerships that will continue to benefit both the resources 

of the National Park as well as the State of Hawaii. 

Those of us that live and work in Hawai’i and appreciate the results of the conservation of native ecosystems owe so much to our local National Parks. So much 

of what is locally assumed to be Conservation Management 101 was developed locally by National Parks resource managers. While the introduction of invasive 

weeds that have altered and replaced native forests spread out of control, the Hawai’i Volcanoes National Park Resource Manager Tim Tunison recognized that by 

setting aside Special Ecological Areas and managing them intensively, tracks of valuable native ecosystems could be preserved. By focusing on the outlying populations 

of invasive plants instead of the heavily infested cores of the populations the rate 

of spread could be slowed, stopped and potentially a strategy for the island wide 

eradication of invasive species was developed and is applied across the state by the 

Invasive Species Committees. 

Even the threat posed by direct flights from the mainland to the island of Maui 

was not given adequate consideration until Haleakala National Park Superintendent Don Reeser stood up to the expansion at Kahului Airport that without 

mitigation would have increased the rate of introduction of invasive species. His 

support prompted years of study and effort that among other successes have produced a Pest Risk Assessment that details the highest risk pathways for the introduction of invasive species as well and the development of a new quarantine facility 

at the airport that will allow the inspection of incoming goods and thereby reduce 

the risk to Maui. Even the mechanism that allows agencies to pool resources to hire 

the Invasive Species Committee and Watershed Partnership field crews that carry 

out invasive species management is based on the original Parks Cooperative Studies 

Unit that evolved to include all of Hawai’i. 

The Natural Resource Protection Cooperative Agreement Act S. 1288 is a positive 

extension of the partnerships that Hawai’i’s National Parks have fostered. By providing protected areas that act as laboratories for the most intensive cutting edge 

management the NPS fosters the development of a valuable core of dedicated individuals. The insights from the management of the parks themselves can lead to conservation measures that improve the conservations of lands across boundaries to include entire landscapes. From working together to stop the spread of the invasive 

tree Miconia into native rainforests to partnerships with neighboring landowners to 

create tracts of cooperatively protected forests the National Parks in Hawai’i are one 

of our most valuable partners. 

PROTECTING HAWAI’I FROM INVASIVE SPECIES

Hawai’i is the most isolated island group in the world but the regulations that 

we rely on to maintain our unique environment are written with a continent in 

mind. Hawaii needs special consideration and special protective measures. Many of 

the species that have spread across the mainland United States have not arrived 

here and will not get here without the aid of a direct flight or shipment. Even native 

species from the mainland US and those species no longer considered a national 

interdiction priority are of utmost importance for Hawai’i to be able to intercept on 

arrival. Recent studies funded by the Hawai’i Invasive Species Council and carried 

out by the Hawai’i Department of Agriculture expanded on the initial risk assessments carried out at the Kahului Airport on Maui and have shown that even preinspected goods contain insects and pathogens not known to occur in Hawai’i. 

While the inspections of goods leaving Hawai’i are for the protection of California, 

Hawai’i has no comparable federal inspection of incoming domestic goods and is left 

vulnerable to the import of materials both domestic and foreign containing invasive 

species that threaten our health, economy and environment. We rely completely on 

our environment and its protection must become our foremost concern. H.R. 3468 

will reduce the risk to Hawai’i from uninspected goods. We support the intent of 

H.R. 3468 and ask that you consider introducing a companion measure in the Senate. 

25

BROWN TREESNAKE COORDINATION AND COOPERATION

The state of Hawai’i is extremely fortunate in having so many treasured endemic 

flora and fauna remaining in the islands. Invasive species threaten that heritage. 

The impact that even one invasive species can have on Pacific Island flora and 

fauna has been made clear by the cases of Tahiti where Miconia, the invasive tree 

from Central and South America has replaced over 2/3 of the forests, and on Guam 

where the Brown Treesnake introduced by United States military traffic has caused 

the extinction of 9 of the 13 remaining native bird species. Miconia has already arrived and is a high priority for control on all Hawaiian island where it occurs. It 

is equally a high priority to prevent the introduction and establishment of the 

Brown Treesnake. 

In 2003, legislation was introduced to the Hawai’i State Legislature that would 

have required all cargo arriving from Guam must be inspected by USDA Wildlife 

Services. One of the barriers to passing this legislation at the time was uncertainty 

as to whether or not a certification method could be developed for cargo originating 

on Guam. Through a cooperative agreement funded by the Hawaii Invasive Species 

Council a Wildlife Services a pilot program was developed to test both the cost of 

the inspection process and the seal or verification of the cargo. Based on preliminary 

results, the pilot program did work and it now seems feasible to develop a system 

to increase the standards applied to civilian cargo departing from Guam. In our 

view efforts to prevent the establishment of Brown Treesnakes in Hawai’i will be 

less effective unless all high risk cargo departing from Guam is subjected to the 

same level of inspection effort. All entities moving materials from Guam to Hawai’i 

must be willing to participate in an interdiction effort that prevents the spread of 

the Brown Treesnake. 

In the Pacific we are fortunate to have a tradition of working together. The Brown 

Tree Snake Control and Eradication Act of 2004 was a welcome recognition of the 

personal commitment of many dedicated individuals and cooperation between agencies. The greatest success of all from Hawai’i’s perspective has been that no Brown 

Treesnakes have been captured on Hawaiian soil since the initiation of the Wildlife 

Services inspections of military and civilian aircraft and cargo on Guam. 

We have concerns that Wildlife Services is not receiving adequate funding to continue these services and that increased military activity in and through Guam will 

increase the risk of a future Brown Treesnake introduction. We hope that the various military services will increase their support and participation in the Brown 

Treesnake interdiction efforts as their operations expand. 

The statement of the sense of Congress in the Brown Tree Snake Control and 

Eradication Act of 2004 is that there should be better coordination on control, interdiction, research, and eradication of Brown Treesnakes. We believe it is vital that 

the preventative steps needed to protect the Pacific islands from Brown Treesnakes 

become part of the operation directive given to all federal agencies, including the 

Department of Defense, that carry out operations that may spread invasive species 

that would cause long-lasting harm. The original congressional statement of concern 

over Brown Treesnakes provides this directive. We hope it will be included in future 

appropriations that support operations on Guam: 

‘‘No Federal agency may authorize, fund, or carry out any action that would likely 

cause or promote the introduction or spread of the brown tree snake in the United 

States or the Freely Associated States. All Federal agencies must consider brown 

tree snake interdiction issues when planning any activity that may cause the accidental introduction of any brown tree snake to uninfested areas in the United 

States and the Freely Associated States. 

Each Federal agency shall provide cooperative support, such as office space, laboratory space, laboratory animal holding facilities, kennel facilities, short-and longterm housing for staff, access to infested snake lands, commissary privileges, power, 

water, and communication lines to Federal agencies and staff of Federal agencies 

conducting brown tree snake control, interdiction, research, and eradication. 

Each Federal agency that manages any lands where the brown tree snake occurs 

shall fund the control and eradication of this species.’’

CONCLUSION

Thank you for the chance to offer a management agency’s perspective on invasive 

species issues in Hawai’i. We believe that continued support for interagency partnerships that ensure there are no gaps between invasive species prevention, early 

detection and rapid response efforts, as well as supporting research and outreach 

programs, is key to our continued success.

26

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much, Mindy. I next call on Neil 

Reimer. 

I want to thank the State Department of Agriculture and the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture for their work on intervening with 

pests and preventing them from reaching the islands. I thank you 

for all you do to keep us free from brown tree snakes and other 

species. You have one of the most difficult jobs there can possibly 

be with respect to invasive species. I look forward to hearing the 

challenges and solutions as you see them. 

So will you begin, Dr. Reimer? 

STATEMENT OF NEIL REIMER, Ph.D., PLANT QUARANTINE 

BRANCH CHIEF, HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Dr. REIMER. Thank you, Senator, for those kind words, and 

thank you for allowing me to testify at this hearing. You have my 

written testimony. What I will do is take up excerpts from that so 

that the audience can also get a sense of what was in the written 

testimony. 

Again, my name is Neil Reimer, and I’m branch chief of the 

Plant Quarantine Branch within the Hawaii Department of Agriculture. 

The Plant Quarantine Branch within HDOA is mandated by 

State law to protect Hawaii’s agricultural and horticultural industries, as well as the State’s natural environment and human 

health, through the interdiction and exclusion of invasive alien species. Invasive species regulated by the branch include non-domestic 

animals, plants, and microorganisms that may be harmful and/or 

pathogenic to humans, animals, plants, and the environment. And 

you’ve heard some examples of that in some of the earlier testimonies. 

Recently, there has been heightened awareness of the problems 

associated with the entry of invasive alien species into Hawaii and 

increased interest and concern in protecting Hawaii’s environment 

and endangered species. The demand that HDOA continue to exclude invasive alien species from Hawaii is growing as evidenced 

by the strong concerns engendered by the Kahului, Maui Airport 

Runway Extension Project, which you heard a little bit about, and 

the creation of the Hawaii Invasive Species Council. 

The Kahului Airport Runway Extension Project consisted of 

plans for major improvements for the airport on Maui to enhance 

airport services and operational safety. These improvements included lengthening and strengthening of an existing runway, constructing a new, state-of-the-art cargo handling facility, expanding 

bulk fuel storage capacity and distribution lines, and improving 

roadways and support facilities. 

What came was a joint Federal-State Environmental Impact 

Statement that identified alien species introduction as an environmental risk associated with the direct overseas flights landing on 

Maui at Kahului Airport. Because of concerns regarding the adequacy of the EIS, the U.S. Department of the Interior asked the 

U.S. Council on Environmental Quality to undertake a review of 

the environmental assessment and to make recommendations. One 

result of this MOU was the implementation of a risk assessment 

of invasive species introductions at Kahului Airport. 

27

The program that I manage was mandated to conduct this risk 

assessment. The Kahului risk assessment involved intensive assessments of checked and carry-on baggage by inspectors and detector dog teams, inspection of aircraft cabins and cargo holds of 

mainland flights and 100 percent inspections of agricultural products shipped by air cargo. The intent was to get a very good scientific handle on exactly what is getting into the State at this one 

port of entry and what remedies we can come up with to address 

the problems that we find. 

A total of 1,400 interceptions were made in the 130-day blitz that 

we called it, for an average of ten interceptions of invasive species 

per day. This compares to an average of 780 interceptions per year, 

which is about two interceptions we have per day on a statewide 

basis. Now, it’s quite a discrepancy. And a lot of that has to do with 

the degree of searching that we were able to do with this. It actually involved a lot of work by the inspectors on an overtime basis 

and other ways of handling that. 

To address the problems found in this risk assessment, inspector 

staffing at the airport was increased from five, which was the normal at that time, to 14 inspectors. Positions were changed from 

temporary to permanent, and a cargo inspection facility is planned 

to be built now, among other things. 

Once an alien species bypasses prevention efforts at the ports 

and becomes established in the State, it’s virtually impossible to 

eradicate. The result is spread throughout the State, including into 

the national parks. It has been well-demonstrated that it’s less 

costly to prevent the entry of invasive species than it is to attempt 

to control them once established. Therefore, there should be a 

strong focus on prevention efforts to ensure that the problem never 

arises in the first place. 

In these prevention efforts in Hawaii, a number of issues have 

surfaced which could be addressed by Federal legislation. I will include three in this testimony, which are preemption, the brown 

tree snakes, and border inspections, and I’ll very briefly summarize 

those, since I only have thirty seconds. 

Preemption. In the past, Hawaii has asked for exemption from 

the preemption clause in the Plant Protection Act. The preemption 

clause establishes that no State may regulate in foreign commerce 

any article, plant, biocontrol organism, plant pest, or noxious weed 

to control, eradicate, or prevent the introduction of the pest into 

the State. It also established that the State may not regulate these 

pests in interstate commerce unless the State’s regulations are 

equal to or less restrictive than the Federal regulations. The clause 

does not allow or—I’m sorry—the clause does allow for the States 

to petition the Secretary of Agriculture to add additional restrictions on a case-by-case basis, which is a timely process. And Mr. 

Fox addressed some of the solutions that are being confronted now 

with Representative Case. 

A request to exempt Hawaii from the importation of ivy gourd 

fruits was denied because of a USDA finding that it did not represent a pest risk to the United States. This was in spite of Hawaii’s testimony that ivy is one of the State’s more serious noxious 

weeds. The State is still working with governing the importation of 

orchids grown in media from Taiwan. Orchids are normally held in 

28

quarantine in Hawaii because of the many various snails, slugs, 

and beetles, biting flies, and viruses that we have found on these 

orchids even when they were brought in to quarantine bare-rooted. 

The State of Hawaii and the Hawaii Orchid Growers Association 

requested USDA to be more restrictive on the requirements for orchid imports into Hawaii. In fact, there’s still a pending case between Hawaii Orchid Growers Association and the USDA on this. 

The importation of orchids in media without any inspection or 

quarantine will exacerbate an already serious problem that affects 

one of Hawaii’s major ornamentals. And, again, some of these pests 

have the potential—may not be host-specific to orchids, such as 

snails and slugs, could become problems in other areas as well. 

Brown tree snakes. Hawaii is concerned with the impact increased military activities in Guam will have on the State of Hawaii. The impact to Hawaii of the proposed expansion and cumulative effects of current and future expansions of the Air Force and 

Navy on Guam need to be addressed. Hawaii would like to see 100 

percent inspection of military vehicles and household goods as well 

as 100 percent coverage by an interdiction program at Guam seaports and airports specifically looking for brown tree snake. 

Border inspections. Following September 11, the inspections of 

agricultural commodities from foreign ports for invasive species has 

shifted from USDA Plant Protection Quarantine to the Department 

of Homeland Security CBP, Customs and Border Protection. Federal agricultural inspectors have been reassigned from PPQ to CBP 

with assurances that there would not be any decrease for invasive 

species. 

The reality appears to be that the focus within CBP has been 

shifted from invasive species detection to the detection of potential 

acts of terrorism, which, of course, is of grave concern as well; however, a mechanism needs to be found to ensure that the inspection 

for invasive species from foreign sources remains a high priority 

within the Federal Government. 

Again, I thank you for the opportunity to testify and look forward 

to any questions you may pose. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Reimer follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF NEIL J. REIMER, PH.D., PLANT QUARANTINE BRANCH

CHIEF, HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Senator Akaka and Senator Wyden, thank you for conducting this hearing and 

for granting me the opportunity to testify on existing legislation and legislative solutions as it relates to invasive species. My name is Neil Reimer. I am the Branch 

Chief for the Plant Quarantine Branch within the Hawaii Department of Agriculture (HDOA). 

The Hawaii Department of Agriculture’s mission is to ensure that agriculture is 

a respected and significant driver of the State’s economy. The Plant Quarantine 

Branch within the Hawaii Department of Agriculture is mandated by state law to 

protect Hawaii’s agricultural and horticultural industries, as well as the State’s natural environment and human health through the interdiction and exclusion of 

invasive alien species. Invasive species regulated by the branch include non-domestic animals, plants, and microorganisms that may be harmful and/or pathogenic to 

humans, animals, plants, and the environment. 

Our counterparts within the federal government include Customs and Border Protection (CBP) within the Department of Homeland Security, the United States Department of Agriculture Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ), and the Fish and 

Wildlife Service (FWS). CBP is mandated to enforce federal agriculture importation 

laws for material arriving from foreign sources. USDA enforces domestic quarVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:57 Dec 15, 2005 Jkt 109209 PO 24981 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\24981.TXT SENERGY2 PsN: PAULM
29

antines for the movement of certain pests between states, and FWS enforces animal 

importations through the Lacey Act. 

Recently, there has been heightened awareness of the problems associated with 

the entry of invasive alien species into Hawaii and increased interest and concern 

in protecting Hawaii’s environment and endangered species. The demand that 

HDOA continue to exclude invasive alien species from Hawaii is growing as evidenced by the strong concerns engendered by the Kahului, Maui airport runway extension project and the creation of the Hawaii Invasive Species Council under the 

governors office, to name a few. 

The Kahului Airport runway extension project consisted of plans for major improvements for the airport on Maui to enhance airport services and operational safety. These improvements included lengthening and strengthening of an existing runway, constructing a new, state-of-art, cargo handling facility, expanding bulk fuel 

storage capacity and distribution lines, and improving airport roadways and support 

facilities. 

A joint Federal-State Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) identified alien species introduction as an environmental risk associated with direct overseas flights 

landing on Maui at Kahului Airport. Because of concerns regarding the adequacy 

of the EIS, the U.S. Department of Interior (USDOI) asked the U.S. Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to undertake a review of the environmental assessment 

and to make recommendations. CEQ convened working sessions involving the U.S. 

Departments of Transportation, Interior, and Agriculture, and the State of Hawaii 

Departments of Transportation, Agriculture, and Land and Natural Resources, to 

address appropriate mitigation measures. These discussions led to adoption of a 

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), dated August 24, 1998, and signed by participating federal and state agencies, for the ‘‘Prevention of Alien Species Introduction through the Kahului Airport’’. One result of this MOU was implementation of 

a risk assessment of invasive species introductions at Kahului Airport. 

The Kahului Airport Pest Risk Assessment (KARA) involved intensive inspections 

of checked and carry-on-baggage by inspectors and detector dog teams; inspections 

of aircraft cabins and cargo holds of mainland flights; and 100% inspections of agricultural products shipped by air cargo. 

A total of 1,897 commercial direct overseas flights, with 399,463 passengers and 

crew on board, were inspected. Agricultural commodities in baggage or the aircraft 

cabin were found in 1,539 of the 1,897 flights. While passengers and the aircraft 

were found to be potential pathways of entry of agricultural commodities and pests 

into Maui, the risk of pest introduction through these pathways was found to be 

small. Inspectors examined 4,644 agricultural items recovered from the cabins of 

aircraft or the carry-on or checked baggage (4,396) of passengers. Passengers declared 3,873 of the 4,644 agricultural products intercepted by inspectors. The remaining 771 agricultural items (16%) were interceptions of items that were not declared on Plant and Animal Declaration Forms distributed on the aircraft prior to 

landing. Only 11 of the 771 intercepted items were found to be infested with a pest 

and were confiscated. 

Detector dog teams monitored 422 flights in the baggage claim area and found 

1,143 agricultural products in baggage. Apples, bananas, and oranges were the products commonly intercepted. Only 3 restricted agricultural commodities were found, 

all Florida citrus without proper documentation for entry into Hawaii. These were 

confiscated and destroyed. Passengers declared 343 of the 1,143 agricultural items 

intercepted by the detector dog teams. The remaining 800 items (70%) were interceptions that were not declared on Plant and Animal Declaration Forms distributed 

on the aircraft prior to landing. 

Cargo was identified as a high-risk pathway for the entry of pests into Maui. A 

total of 480 different agricultural products were identified in cargo shipments and 

subjected to inspection. Pests were found on 114 different agricultural products: 51% 

of the products were infested less than 10% of the time; 49% of the commodities 

were infested more than 10% of the time. A total of 1,401 insect interceptions were 

made on agricultural commodities. Of the 279 species intercepted, 125 were not 

known to occur in Hawaii; 103 were established in Hawaii; and 51 were of undetermined status. One hundred fifty-six interceptions involved plant disease organisms, 

47 of which were determined to be pathogenic species. 

A total of 1,401 interceptions were made in the 130-day blitz for an average of 

10.8 interceptions per day for the KARA. This compares to an average of 782 interceptions per year (2.1 quarantine pest interceptions per day) on a statewide basis 

for the years 1995 through 2001. 

These numbers give information on the problems with prevention of invasive species importations at one port of entry. In fact, this is a limited port of entry in that 

30

only certain commodities are allowed into the state through this port. The problem 

is worse at other ports. 

To address the problems found in this risk assessment, inspector staffing at the 

airport was increased from 5 to 14 inspectors, positions were changed from temporary to permanent, and a cargo inspection facility will be built, among others. 

Once an alien species bypasses prevention efforts at the ports and becomes established in the State it is virtually impossible to eradicate. The result is spread 

throughout the State including into the National Parks. What follows is environmental degradation, loss of species diversity, extinction of species, and other continuous economic losses for the rest of history. It has been well demonstrated that it 

is less costly to prevent the entry of invasive species than it is to attempt to control 

them once established. Therefore, there should be a strong focus on prevention efforts to ensure that the problem never arrives. 

In these prevention efforts in Hawaii, a number of issues have surfaced which 

could be addressed by federal legislation. I will include three in this testimony; preemption, brown tree snake, and border inspections. 

PREEMPTION

In the past, Hawaii has asked for exemption from the preemption clause (sec. 436) 

in the Plant Protection Act. The preemption clause establishes that no state may 

regulate in foreign commerce any article, plant, biocontrol organism, plant pest, or 

noxious weed to control, eradicate, or prevent the introduction of the pest into the 

state. It also established that the state may not regulate these pests in interstate 

commerce unless the state’s regulations are equal to or less restrictive than the federal regulations. The clause does allow for the states to petition the Secretary of Agriculture to add additional restrictions on a case by case basis. 

A request to exempt Hawaii from the importation of ivy gourd fruits was denied 

because of a USDA finding that it did not represent a pest risk to the United States. 

This was in spite of Hawaii’s testimony that ivy gourd is one of the State’s most 

serious noxious weeds. This aggressive vine has invaded the lowlands, covering up 

trees and telephone poles alike. If a Federal preemption clause had been invoked 

on the regulation that allowed the interstate movement of honey bees, it would have 

also allowed honey bees to enter the State even though Hawaii does not have the 

Varroa and tracheal mites, has a State law that prohibits the entry of honey bees, 

and has the means for keeping them out of the State through interstate cargo, baggage, and mail inspections. If bromeliads were allowed to enter Hawaii with media 

attached as proposed earlier and a preemption clause had been invoked, it would 

have been an avenue for tropical biting midges to enter the islands and become established. The State is still very much concerned about the preemption in Federal 

rules governing the importation of orchids grown in media from Taiwan, and proposals for importations of orchids from other tropical and subtropical areas of the 

world. Orchids are normally held in quarantine in Hawaii because of the many various snails, slugs, ants, beetles, biting flies, and viruses that have been found associated with even bare-rooted plants. The State of Hawaii and the Hawaii Orchid 

Growers Association (HOGA) requested USDA to be more restrictive on the requirements for orchid imports into Hawaii. At a minimum, the request was to allow for 

inspection of the imported orchids. The main concern was for the accidental importation of slugs and snails as has been seen on orchid imports in the past. HOGA 

has initiated a lawsuit against USDA because of this decision. The importation of 

orchids in media without any inspection or quarantine will exacerbate an already 

serious problem that affects one of Hawaii’s major ornamentals. 

Finally, an exemption from the Federal preemption clause is especially important 

for places like Hawaii when one also considers that Federal quarantines are frequently established to protect major crops that are grown in the continental U.S., 

which it should. Because of climatic differences between the continental U.S. and 

the non-contiguous states, however, Hawaii’s most important crops are considered 

minor. Case in point, for several decades mealybugs have been entering the continental U.S. on foreign bananas. These bananas are inspected and released by federal agencies in California (U.S. port of entry) based on bananas not being a major 

agricultural crop in the continental U.S. and, therefore, banana consumed as food 

not being considered a high pest risk. Banana was and still is a major crop in Hawaii, however. Whenever mealybug-infested bananas enter Hawaii from California, 

they are treated by freezing, fumigated with methyl bromide, or rejected. In 1984, 

a mealybug on bananas from Central America that had entered the U.S. via California became established in Hawaii and found its way onto some Hawaii flowers 

that were exported to California. The flowers were rejected in California. The 

31

mealybug is still being found on bananas that are imported into Hawaii from Central America via California. 

Awareness of these issues has prompted Representative Ed Case to introduce a 

bill (H.R. 3468) which would provide additional inspections and establish an expedited process for States to seek approval of the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior for specific prohibitions or restrictions upon the introduction or movement of 

invasive species from domestic or foreign locations to Hawaii. HDOA hopes you will 

review this bill and introduce a companion into the Senate. 

BROWN TREE SNAKE

Hawaii is concerned with the impact increased military activities on Guam will 

have on the State of Hawaii. The impact to Hawaii of the proposed expansion and 

the cumulative effects of current and future expansions of the Air Force and Navy 

on Guam need to be considered. 

Current military activities on Guam have increased the risk of accidental importation to Hawaii of brown tree snake and other alien species. Brown tree snakes have 

been intercepted eight times in Hawaii in association with the movement of military 

aircraft, equipment, supplies, empty containers and household goods of military personnel. An increase in military movement will increase the risks for the movement 

of these pests to Hawaii. 

The brown tree snake was likely introduced to the island of Guam in materials 

moved by the military during the late 1940’s. The snake has caused, and continues 

to cause, significant economic, ecological, and human health impacts to Guam. The 

brown tree snake is responsible for the extinction of 9 of 13 native forest bird species on Guam. The brown tree snake causes frequent electrical power outages and 

is a concern for human health and safety. Snakes currently occur at high densities 

on Guam and there is a significant risk that these snakes will be transported off 

Guam in military transport and cargo. 

Similar impacts would be experienced in Hawaii should the snake become established here. Experts estimate the potential economic impact to Hawaii would be between $400 million and $1.8 billion annually. 

Hawaii would like to see 100% inspection of military vehicles and household 

goods, as well as 100% coverage by an interdiction program at Guam sea ports and 

airports. It is important that invasive species mitigation, especially regarding the 

movement of pests in military aircraft, cargo, and personal effects, become a required component in military budgeting for base operations. The military needs to 

take responsibility for the movement of these pests. This is especially problematic 

during times of war as the movement of military equipment increases but the repercussions of not taking this into consideration are the movement and establishment 

of invasive species which will cause ecological, health, and economic losses long after 

the war is over and potentially for all future generations. 

BORDER INSPECTIONS

Following September 11 the inspections of agricultural commodities from foreign 

ports for invasive species has shifted from USDA/PPQ to DHS/CBP. Federal agriculture inspectors have been reassigned from PPQ to CBP with assurances that 

there would not be any decrease in the inspection of foreign agriculture commodities 

for invasive species. The reality appears to be that the focus within CBP has shifted 

from invasive species detection to the detection of potential acts of terrorism. This 

has become a great concern among the state departments of agriculture as an increase establishment of invasive species from foreign sources will have a severe negative impact on the agricultural economy. Many of these pests will also reach the 

National Parks. A mechanism needs to be found to ensure that the inspection for 

invasive species from foreign sources remains a high priority within the federal government. 

CONCLUSION

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before this committee. Some of these concerns may appear to be removed from the National Park system but all of the alien 

invasive species that are currently causing serious problems in the parks came into 

the State from outside sources, many unintentionally. We appreciate you taking the 

time to listen to testimony on these serious issues.

Senator AKAKA. Thank you. Thank you very much, Dr. Reimer. 

I have questions here for Mark Fox. We look upon the Nature 

Conservancy as having a broad view of Hawaii and conservation efVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:57 Dec 15, 2005 Jkt 109209 PO 24981 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 P:\DOCS\24981.TXT SENERGY2 PsN: PAULM
32

forts throughout the State, and I would like to ask this question 

of you. In combating invasive species in Hawaii, where do you see 

the greatest opportunity for success? 

Mr. FOX. Well, we’ve all been commenting on the issue of prevention, and while we may lose battles and even wars if we don’t deal 

with the pests that we have here now, like Miconia and now things 

like the wiliwili gallwasp, we’ve got to fight this battle on two 

fronts: Detecting and responding to and controlling the devastating 

pests we have now. But to answer your question, I think, again, 

the best opportunity for the greatest successes are figuring out systems of quarantine and inspection and managing incoming cargo 

that will prevent new introductions. 

We may need to spend a few million more dollars a year in improving Neil’s program and giving him the inspectors he needs, but 

that’s going to pale in comparison to the tens of millions, if not 

hundreds of millions, of dollars we’re going to need to spend once 

new pests get established. I think the best opportunity for actual 

success, as opposed to just controlling the things we have, is preventing the new introductions. 

Senator AKAKA. Since we are limiting it, in a sense, to national 

parks, is the strategy that you are mentioning appropriate for national parks and public lands, or are there other approaches that 

would work for them? 

Mr. FOX. I think the strategy is eminently appropriate for national parks and public lands. We’re very lucky in Hawaii and all 

over the country to have the National Park System and other public lands. I include in that especially Defense Department lands. 

Some of these places contain the best examples of native ecosystems across our country because they have been under management regimes for long periods of time and haven’t been developed, 

and, again, I say I include the Defense Department in that they’ve 

got vast tracks of land that, while they’re certainly impacted by 

military training to a large degree, they have been left in their natural state and undeveloped. 

And so, again, preventing new introductions is supremely important to making sure that these areas that represent some of the 

best of the national ecosystems that we have left in this country 

are protected. 

Senator AKAKA. Have there been specific Hawaii statutes that 

have been enacted which have contributed to the success of 

invasive species management? 

Mr. FOX. Sure. 

As Mindy mentioned, the Hawaii Invasive Species Council Authorization Act, a couple of years ago, has really put us leaps ahead 

of where we were just a couple of years ago, and the follow-up 

funding for that. It was the catalyst of all of that, to bring us all 

around, focusing collaborative efforts on prevention of new species, 

controlling species that are already here, doing scientific research 

on how to deal with pest species, doing public outreach and education so more people can understand why they shouldn’t bring 

things back with them when they come to Hawaii, how they should 

report things that they see, and how they should prevent moving 

things around. So the Hawaiian Invasive Species Council legislaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:57 Dec 15, 2005 Jkt 109209 PO 24981 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 P:\DOCS\24981.TXT SENERGY2 PsN: PAULM
33

tion has been a wonderful piece of legislation that’s progressed us 

forward. 

Unfortunately, we have missed the boat a couple of times on a 

few things that we’re going to continue to try to get introduced and 

passed in the Hawaii State legislature, and that would include creating dedicated sources of State funding for invasive species. Right 

now, it’s annual appropriations at the State level as well as methods to allow the State Department of Agriculture to protect itself 

from things like the brown tree snake introduction. 

A bill that was worked on at the legislature a couple years ago 

to try to require that anything coming from Guam had to be certified as having been inspected on Guam before it left failed in the 

State legislature, but we’re gathering better data on how that type 

of predeparture inspection program would work on Guam so that 

it would be a smooth operating system that would not impact commerce negatively or movement of stuff between——

Senator AKAKA. On the Federal level, looking at Representative 

Case’s H.R. 3468 and my bill being proposed, do you think these 

bills will help, or is there something else that’s needed on a Federal 

level in legislation? 

Mr. FOX. Those are the ones. You’ve got them. A combination of 

those two and others that you’re sponsoring, like the Aquatic 

Invasive Species Act, excellent. 

Senator AKAKA. Comes out to be prevention and response and 

control. 

Mr. FOX. Yes, sir. 

Senator AKAKA. Well, thank you. 

Dr. Wilkinson, I understand that the State has a coordinated effort for the control of both aquatic and terrestrial invasive species. 

In your opinion, which invasive species poses the greatest threat to 

the ecology of Hawaii, and what do you estimate it will cost to control the spread of these species? 

Dr. WILKINSON. Well, there are good arguments for a number of 

species, and some of the best arguments would probably be for species that aren’t here yet, such as the brown tree snake, that as far 

back as August 1, 1905, we had the cooperation of the U.S. Department of Agriculture in saying that they would ban the importation 

or stop allowing permits for the importation of snakes into Hawaii, 

and still we’re struggling with that. 

The Brown Tree Snake Control Act of 2004 also had a provision 

to improve quarantine for brown tree snakes, and still, you know, 

we’re relying on, right now, our State effort to look at what we can 

do to improve our quarantine. But as far as species that are already here, I’m going to pick Miconia calvescens, the tree that’s impacting the forests here on the Big Island, that’s widespread on 

Maui, and that we actually think we can eradicate on Oahu and 

Kauai islandwide. 

I think it’s a good example because although it is a terrestrial 

species, a plant species, it negatively affects the watershed, which 

not only impacts agriculture and the resources available to the people that live here, but potentially negatively impacts the coastal resources as well, increased sedimentation, and the changes in the 

forest affect the reef. 

34

What could be done to improve our coordinated control efforts for 

this species? I think that the bill that you proposed to allow the 

National Parks to form partnerships, S. 1288, is an important step. 

We’re not just asking for the national parks to step up and take 

responsibility. We’re just asking that they be allowed to participate 

to the extent that they want to. We have crews controlling Miconia 

near the national park on Maui, and it would really help to have 

that other crew working in closer coordination with them across 

that border. 

The other bill that you proposed, the Public Lands Act, is exactly 

the kind of support that we would like to match with our increased 

State commitment in resources to fund crews, cooperative crews, to 

go out and control these invasive species wherever they occur on 

a species-by-species basis where we know we can eradicate them 

and have a true long-term biological impact here in Hawaii. So we 

really appreciate your efforts there. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you, Mindy. As you can tell, besides asking a lot what the State is doing, I’m asking what you think the 

Federal Government should be doing. And I thank you for your response on that, too, and that of Mr. Fox. 

Dr. Reimer, your testimony noted that the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture has several times refused to grant Hawaii an exemption from the Plant Protection Act to allow it to better protect 

against potential invasive species or other dangerous pests. What 

has been the rationale of the USDA in denying Hawaii these protective exemptions? Is Federal legislation exempting Hawaii from 

that the only viable solution? 

Dr. REIMER. The rationale varies, but essentially, they go 

through a risk assessment, and based on the risk assessment conducted by the USDA staff, they conclude that it’s not high risk for 

the importation of these into Hawaii. But what we see is they don’t 

always look at the same data that we do, if you will. For example, 

for the orchids, they did not consider slugs and snails is my understanding, or biting flies that have been associated with sphagnum 

moss. They feel that in this case, the mitigation measures are in 

place because of the way it’s being grown in Taiwan and felt that 

it should be safe to come in under those conditions, with very minimal inspection. In reality, we know that that may be true for the 

first year, maximum, but that those inspections are going to decrease over time. 

The greenhouse conditions on the other side in Taiwan are not 

going to be how they are now when they initiate the program. It’s 

going to lapse. So we have serious concerns to base it on that. 

That’s why we prefer, at a minimum, that we at least be able to 

inspect these when they come in, even as a back-up. And that was 

denied. 

Senator AKAKA. Let me mention another concern you have. I 

know that the possible introduction of brown tree snakes into Hawaii is of great concern of all of us. You have raised the possibility 

of increased military activity in Guam as increasing the threat of 

accidental introduction of the snake here in Hawaii. Short of curtailing these increased military activities, what additional actions 

can be taken to minimize this threat? 

35

Also, I heard about the possible snake sighting on Kauai recently. Do you have any new information on that? 

Dr. REIMER. The brown tree snake is probably one of our major 

concerns. And also what is happening now on Guam with the cooperation between the U.S. military and USDA Wildlife Services 

nationally is a breakdown, and that is of great concern to us. We 

feel, to be blunt, that DOD is not taking their share in the responsibility of ensuring that the brown tree snake does not leave in the 

products that they’re moving from Guam. We feel they should take 

much higher responsibility to ensure that there is 100 percent inspection. The mechanism I’m not sure, but right now the entity in 

place there to do that is USDA Wildlife Services. 

As far as curtailing buildup of the military, I don’t think that’s 

an option. I wouldn’t even suggest that. But I think the fact that 

there is a buildup of military needs to be considered and needs to 

increase the inspection level for things leaving Guam. And not just 

for Hawaii; they need to consider moving to the other islands as 

well which are free of brown tree snakes. 

As far as the update of the snake on Kauai, there was a sighting. 

There was some—it’s not—well, how do I put this? There was a 

sighting. A 16-year-old girl made a sighting. There was some evidence. Different testimonies came in which were contradictory. So 

it very possibly was a credible sighting; we’re not certain of that, 

but that’s beside the point. When we do get information like that, 

we always do consider it to be a credible sighting and go in 100 

percent. We have been doing the follow-up on that. By ‘‘we,’’ I 

mean—I’m not speaking for the Department of Ag, just a cooperative effort with the Department of Agriculture, Department of the 

Land and Natural Resources, USDA Wildlife Services, and BIISC, 

the Big Island Invasive Species Committee. There may be others 

which I have missed, and I’m sorry, but they’re out there daily, setting up traps, doing searches in the area, and have not found any 

evidence of a snake at this point. 

Senator AKAKA. Well, thank you. Thank you for your testimony. 

It will certainly be helpful to us, so thank you very much. 

Dr. REIMER. Thank you, sir. 

Senator AKAKA. The panel, too. Thank you very much. 

I would like to call on the next panel, on partnerships: Julie 

Leialoha, who is manager of the Big Island Invasive Species Committee. Also, Teya Penniman, manager of the Maui invasive Species Committee, and Mr. Peter Simmons, regional operations director, Kamehameha Schools, Kailua-Kona. 

Will you, please, come forward. Thank you very much. 

Since you are from the Big Island, Julie, I would like to say a 

special mahalo nui loa for hosting us today and for coming to the 

hearing. The county committees are the ground-zero level in fighting invasive species, and I thank all the county committees for 

their dedication and hard work on the front lines of this battle. I 

look forward to hearing your testimony of partnerships and your 

suggestions, also, for them. 

So will you please begin, Julie? 

36

STATEMENT OF JULIE LEIALOHA, MANAGER BIG ISLAND 

INVASIVE SPECIES COMMITTEE, HILO, HI 

Ms. LEIALOHA. Thank you, Senator Akaka, and distinguished 

members of the committee. I appreciate being invited here to speak 

today. I wanted to focus my testimony primarily on our partnership 

programs for the Big Island. 

As the Big Island Invasive Species Committee manager, I’m responsible for ensuring that our program complies with our strategic 

plan, a plan that was developed with the aid of all our participating partners, including the staff of the National Park Service 

who has been instrumental in developing control strategies of 

invasive species within its boundaries. 

BIISC, or the Big Island Invasive Species Committee, is a voluntary partnership of private citizens, community organizations, 

businesses, landowners, and government agencies such as the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, the Institute of Pacific Island Forestry, National Park Service, State Department of 

Land and National Resources, University of Hawaii, Research Corporation of the University of Hawaii, and the Pacific Cooperative 

Studies Unit, who are united to address the invasive species issues 

on the island of Hawaii. 

Partnerships of this nature are imperative in today’s complex 

world of dealing with the species. Others have already pointed out 

the tremendous influx of organisms we face every day. How do we 

fully address the impacts of invasive species on our national environment, cultural heritage significant to Hawaii, as well as meet 

the economic goals and growth of our islands? I must refer back to 

our partnerships. Though agencies may have boundaries, our 

invasive species have no such boundaries and very few environmental limitations. BIISC, along with the other invasive species 

programs, was formed to fill a void in assisting other agencies in 

its war on invasive species. 

We strive to avoid the creation of a new bureaucratic structure, 

which is very challenging, I must add, and, instead, focus on working with existing organizations and agencies to achieve goals. We 

are one of the few agencies that deals with invasive species on private property while also assisting partner agencies, such as the 

State Department of Agriculture, Department of Land and Natural 

Resources, and the National Park Service. Our program priorities 

are organized around a key list of target invasive species, a hit list 

of sorts. This hit list is intended to identify plants and organisms 

that pose a serious threat to Hawaii so control measures can be organized. 

The main goal is for effective pest prevention before it becomes 

a serious problem requiring enormous resources. We call this early 

detection and rapid response. Like all of the other invasive species 

committees, we prefer to measure our success in terms of pest infestations prevented, contained, or eradicated. And the only way we 

can do this is with our partners. 

Like any other program, our resources are limited. We’re happy 

to assist partners when we can and often request services of our 

partners as well. Most of the Federal lands of Hawaii Island are 

identified as high resource value lands. Lands immediately adjacent to Federal lands, such as the Park Service, are also considered 

37

a high priority for protection purposes. BIISC does spend a portion 

of our financial resources to ensure that invasive species stay out 

of high value resource zones like Hawaii Volcanoes National Park 

and would like to see Park Service employees involved in these control efforts as well, invasive species outside as well as vice versa. 

All available resources should be utilized to attack the problem as 

a whole. We should not allow political boundaries to dictate 

invasive species control efforts. 

Obviously, for this reason, the islands’ invasive species committees were formed to fill that gap. However, we can’t do it alone. It’s 

imperative that our Federal brethren be authorized to work with 

its partners including fiscal expenditures outside of its jurisdictional boundaries. Though scientific partnerships help programs 

like BIISC create solid control efforts on the ground, we lack the 

staffing resources many of these organisms require to make a dent. 

Combining efforts makes the most sense. Our goal is not only to 

work with our partner agencies, but to create community cooperators to help control targeted species within their own communities. 

Community partnerships are also instrumental in invasive species 

control efforts. 

Our community partners have been very involved in invasive 

species control efforts, particularly with focus on controlling coqui 

frogs. This has been the focus point of invasive species on the Big 

Island lately, which Mayor Kim can attest to. I call it, however—

in my case, I sort of call it the flavor of the month since there are 

other invasive species that probably require the same amount of attention this little frog is currently getting. There are other threats 

that actually pose a much larger problem, and they don’t make as 

much noise, such as the little red fire ant that can blind domestic 

animals, which many of us believe may be a much larger problem 

than coqui, or a new species of mosquitoes, for example, that was 

recently identified on the Big Island known to be a carrier of West 

Nile Virus. 

The question was posed to me of what invasive species would 

pose the greatest threat to the Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. 

For Hawaii Island, I would have to say probably the coqui frog. 

This tiny frog is now zapping a tremendous amount of BIISC resources. Breeding populations exist on the boundaries of this park, 

and the march continues, as there have been confirmed captures of 

this pest within the park’s boundaries. The next species probably 

could be the fire ant or perhaps the stinging nettle caterpillar, or 

a host of invasive plant species. This list is endless. The key is to 

identify the threat before it becomes a problem, coordinate a rapid 

response, and utilize all existing means to eradicate the threat immediately. 

Just made it. Thank you. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you. 

Ms. Penniman, thank you for coming from Maui and for representing the first of the county invasive species committees to be 

established. I appreciate hearing the wisdom from your experiences 

on Maui and also appreciate the partnership with the Maui County 

Council and its strong support of your efforts. So would you please 

provide us with your testimony. 

38

STATEMENT OF TEYA M. PENNIMAN, MANAGER, MAUI 

INVASIVE SPECIES COMMITTEE, MAKAWAO, HI 

Ms. PENNIMAN. Thank you, Senator Akaka. I’m pleased to be 

here today and presenting testimony about the importance of partnerships in Hawaii that are working to address the impacts of 

invasive species on our environment, economy, and quality of life. 

Hawaii is an excellent forum to discuss invasive species, not only 

because of the wealth of resources and risks here, but also because 

of the innovative approaches that the Aloha State has developed. 

As is true, and as others have mentioned, throughout the 50 

States and all U.S. territories, invasive species in Hawaii know no 

boundaries. When a species is found on private, county, State and/

or Federal lands, jurisdictional conflicts or uncertainty can arise, 

hindering efforts to quickly mount an effective response. Additionally, for many national resource agencies, addressing invasive species threats often falls into the category of extra, not primary, responsibilities. At times, despite the best intentions of government 

agencies to cooperate on cross-boundary issues, significant jurisdictional and resource gaps exist, affecting our ability to detect and 

engage a coordinated response to invasive pests. 

Often, the public must be engaged in efforts to detect or control 

a target species. Thus, ongoing education and public outreach efforts are essential to building and maintaining public support, yet 

the public is susceptible to becoming war-weary if too many or conflicting messages are broadcast about each new invasive pest to 

reach our shores. Clearly, a means for coordinating efforts at the 

local level is needed in order to be effective at detecting and responding to invasive pest species. One other aspect is that sometimes the logistics of and manpower required to address particular 

species may outstrip resources of a single agency. 

On Maui, concerned local resource managers first began meeting 

in the 1990’s to consider how to stop the spread of Miconia 

calvescens and other closely related plants. The group soon recognized the need to broaden the scope of activity and formed the 

Maui Invasive Species Committee. The committee secured funding 

to hire staff in 1999. Today, we have nearly 30 staff members 

working to control targeted plants and animals in the county of 

Maui. Now, on each of the other major islands, Kauai, Oahu, Maui, 

Molokai, and Hawaii, an invasive species committee is working to 

prevent the establishment of new invasive species, control targeted 

incipient species, and involve the public in prevention and control 

activities. 

This work has been possible only because of an exemplary commitment from our partner agencies. MISC partners include private 

landowners, government agencies, and nonprofit organizations, 

pretty much the same list of Federal agencies that we heard Julie 

mention. And particularly, on Maui, the National Park Service has 

been a very important partner for us. These partners have provided 

significant funding, which has allowed us to make progress on our 

targeted species. 

However, MISC partners do much more than simply provide 

funding. Local knowledge of national resources and threats has 

been critical to its effectiveness. Agency representatives, among the 

most knowledgeable in the State, if not the Nation, meet bimonthly 

39

to share information, evaluate potential target species, suggest 

management practices, review progress, and of course always agree 

100 percent on what we should do. 

I believe that the existence of the Invasive Species Committees, 

along with their demonstrated ability to translate action plans into 

concrete results, was a significant factor in helping to convince the 

Hawaii legislature and administration to provide the significant 

funding in recent years to addresses invasive species. 

The Hawaii model has practical applications nationwide. Representatives from Hawaii regularly participate in national workshops, review panels and symposia, including a recent workshop on 

pythons in the Everglades National Park. MISC is currently collaborating with economists at the University of Hawaii to apply 

cost/benefit analyses to management of the invasive weed Miconia. 

MISC staff is working to introduce local teachers to a Maui-based 

science curriculum developed under the leadership of Haleakala 

National Park. Using this curriculum, students on Maui are learning to capture and identify ant species to help detect any incipient 

populations of fire ants on Maui. 

One of the driving reasons for our work is to keep invasive pests 

out of the natural areas, including the spectacular Haleakala National Park, by surveying and controlling target species elsewhere 

on the island. Our staff actually rarely visit the pristine areas because we work at the interface of the urban areas and the rural 

areas, working to keep those pests out of the park. Thus, our efforts, which are supported by State and county funds, in addition 

to Federal funds, provide significant benefits to Federal resources, 

in particular park resources. 

I would like to conclude by noting that partnerships are the key 

to bridging jurisdictional and resource gaps. Partnerships help tap 

collective knowledge of local scientists, resource managers, and policymakers and focus their problem-solving abilities on the most 

pressing invasive species issues. Partnerships help generate and, 

importantly, leverage funding to get workers on the ground when 

government agencies may be unable to take direct action. 

Federal agencies are and, I hope, will continue to be valued 

members of the Invasive Species Committee partnerships. Your vision, Senator Akaka, your interest, and your support are crucial to 

our work. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Penniman follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TEYA M. PENNIMAN, MANAGER, MAUI INVASIVE SPECIES

COMMITTEE, MAKAWAO, HI 

I am pleased to present testimony on the use of partnerships in Hawaii to address 

the impacts of invasive species on our environment, economy and quality of life. Hawaii is an excellent forum to discuss invasive species, not only because of the wealth 

of resources at risk here, but also because of the innovative approach the Aloha 

State has developed. As the Manager of the Maui Invasive Species Committee, I 

would like to highlight the importance of partnerships at all levels of our work. 

Partnerships are the key to bridging jurisdictional and resource gaps. Partnerships help tap the collective knowledge of local scientists, resource managers, and 

policy makers and focus their problem-solving abilities on the most pressing 

invasive species issues. Partnerships help generate and leverage funding to get 

workers on the ground when government agencies may be unable to take direct action. Partnerships help ensure that actions are coordinated, not duplicated, to maximize efficiency and ensure the wise use of limited resources. 

40

1. EFFECTIVE PARTNERSHIPS ARE NEEDED TO CONTROL INVASIVE SPECIES

As is true throughout the 50 States and all U.S. territories, invasive species in 

Hawaii know no boundaries. When a species is found on private, county, state and 

federal lands, jurisdictional conflicts or uncertainty can arise, hindering efforts to 

quickly mount an effective response. Additionally, for many natural resource agencies, addressing invasive species threats often falls into the category of extra—as opposed to primary—responsibilities. At times, despite the best intentions of government agencies to cooperate on cross-boundary issues, significant jurisdictional and 

resource gaps exist, affecting our ability to detect and engage a coordinated response 

to invasive pests. 

Given the plethora of potential targets affecting Hawaii, knowing when to marshal and deploy appropriate resources requires having a clear set of decision criteria. Without an existing system or infrastructure, critical response time can be 

lost. Often, the public must be engaged in efforts to detect or control a target species. Thus, ongoing education and public outreach efforts are essential to building 

and maintaining public support. Yet, the public is susceptible to becoming warweary, if too many or conflicting messages are broadcast about each new invasive 

pest to reach our shores. Clearly, a means for coordinating efforts at the local level 

is needed in order to be effective at detecting and responding to invasive pest species. 

2. PARTNERSHIPS IN HAWAII

In Hawaii, on each of the major islands—Kauai, Oahu, Maui, Molokai, and Hawaii—an Invasive Species Committee (ISC) is working to prevent the establishment 

of new invasive species, control targeted incipient species, and educate and involve 

the public in prevention and control activities. On Maui, concerned local resource 

managers first began meeting in the early 1990’s to consider how to stop the spread 

of Miconia calvescens and other closely-related plants. The group recognized the 

need to broaden the scope of activity and formed the Maui Invasive Species Committee in 1997. The Committee secured funding to hire staff in 1999. Today, we 

have nearly 30 staff members working to control targeted terrestrial plants and animals in the County of Maui. 

MISC’s work has been possible only because of exemplary commitment from our 

partner agencies. MISC’s partners include the following private landowners, government agencies, and nonprofit organizations: the County of Maui; State of Hawaii, 

including the Department of Land & Natural Resources and Department of Agriculture; National Park Service; US Fish & Wildlife Service; USDA Forest Service; 

USDA Wildlife Services; US Department of Defense; and several other communitybased companies and nonprofits, such as Maui Land & Pineapple Company, and 

The Nature Conservancy. Financial support from these and other agencies and organizations, such as the National Fish & Wildlife Foundation, has allowed us to make 

significant progress detecting and controlling a host of target species. 

However, MISC’s partners do much more than simply provide funding. Local 

knowledge of natural resources and threats has been critical to MISC’s effectiveness. 

Agency representatives, among the most knowledgeable in the state, if not the nation, meet bimonthly to share information, evaluate potential target species, suggest 

management practices, and review progress. Most of Maui’s committee members 

have been involved with MISC since its early beginnings, fourteen (14) years ago. 

The existence of the Invasive Species Committees, along with their demonstrated 

ability to translate action plans into concrete results, was a significant factor in convincing the Hawaii legislature and administration to dedicate $8 million in state 

funding for invasive species over the last two years. Because the ISCs had the infrastructure to put more crew to work combating miconia, coqui frogs, pampas grass, 

and other identified pest species, it was possible to quickly demonstrate results from 

additional funding. Additionally, because receipt of State funding was contingent 

upon generating matching funds from non-State sources, federal funding was crucial 

to securing these additional funds over the last two years. These funds supported 

four components of a state-wide strategy: prevention, response & control, research 

& technology, and public outreach. 

The Hawaii model has practical applications nationwide. Representatives from 

Hawaii regularly participate in national workshops, review panels and symposia, including a recent workshop on pythons in the Everglades National Park. MISC is collaborating with economists at the University of Hawaii to apply cost/benefit analyses to management of the invasive weed, miconia. MISC staff is working to introduce local teachers to a Maui-based science curriculum developed under the leadership of Haleakala National Park. Using this curriculum, students on Maui are 

41

learning to capture and identify ant species to help detect any incipient populations 

of fire ants. 

Similar efforts to select and prioritize target species, evaluate ongoing activities, 

and share knowledge and resources are occurring across the state, on each island. 

The Coordinating Group on Alien Pest Species (CGAPS) provides an important 

statewide forum for invasive species issues. These island-based partnerships along 

with CGAPS are helping to sustain a successful collaboration of private landowners, 

government agencies and nonprofits. 

3. THE ROLE OF FEDERAL PARTNERS

One of driving reasons for our work is to keep invasive pests out of the natural 

areas, including the spectacular Haleakala National Park, by surveying and controlling target species elsewhere on the island. We frequently work in residential areas 

and at the interface of natural areas and rural lands, often in habitats that have 

already been largely altered. Our crews rarely see the pristine habitats they are protecting. Thus, our efforts, which are supported by state and county funds in addition 

to federal funds, provide significant benefits to federal resources, in particular, park 

resources. As noted above, invasive species have no respect for political or jurisdictional boundaries. Two of our primary target species, pampas grass and miconia, 

have been found within park boundaries. Without continued vigilance, these species 

would flourish within the Park. Allowing the National Park Service to use federal 

resources for work on invasive species outside park boundaries, as contemplated in 

the Natural Resources Protection Cooperative Agreement Act, S. 1288, is not only 

logical from a resource management perspective, but also equitable, from the perspective of shared responsibilities among partners. 

Other cooperative funding avenues are essential to maintain the progress we have 

made on pushing back the most threatening species on Maui and elsewhere in the 

islands. The life history and sheer competitiveness of most invasive pests require 

a long-term commitment to the effort. Continued and enhanced cost-share federal 

programs, such as the Cooperative Conservation Initiative, and the Federal Noxious 

Weed Bill, will be essential to ensuring on-the-ground success. New funding sources 

are needed to address species such as the coqui frog. 

4. CONCLUSION

Effective partnerships are essential to detect and control the most serious invasive 

plant and animals threats, but are not adequate without other important components. In addition to response and control, Hawaii must be able to develop and implement meaningful prevention measures to stem the seemingly endless onslaught 

of new pests that are sapping our resources and decimating our irreplaceable natural treasures. The Hawaii Invasive Species Prevention Act, introduced in the 

House, would be a positive step in this direction by helping to reduce the risk of 

unwanted introductions to Hawai’i. Continued efforts to find safe, host-specific biocontrol agents must continue to be supported. In summary, innovative approaches 

are working in Hawai’i. The need for continued partnering and additional resources 

is critical. Your vision, interest and support are crucial to our work. Thank you for 

the opportunity to testify.

Senator AKAKA. Thank you for your testimony, Teya. 

Mr. Simmons, as you know, I am a proud graduate of Kamehameha Schools and have fond memories and current connections 

with the school. I’m pleased to hear about this partnership that the 

school has with the Park Service to involve and teach students 

about invasive species on Kamehameha land and park land, and I 

look forward to hearing your testimony on this partnership. You 

may proceed. 

STATEMENT OF PETER SIMMONS, REGIONAL ASSET

MANAGER, LAND ASSETS DIVISION/ENDOWMENT GROUP,

KAMEHAMEHA SCHOOLS 

Mr. SIMMONS. I wasn’t going to talk about the partnership. No, 

just kidding. 

I have submitted written testimony, so I don’t want to go over 

that in detail. I’d like to maybe discuss a little bit about what 

42

drives us to the partnership and then how we’re trying to do our 

part. 

As you know, this has been a tremendous period of transition 

these last 5 to 7 years with Kamehameha, and one thing that 

emerges very clearly is that we are a Hawaiian institution. And 

that’s not obvious to—it was not obvious to everyone who works 

with Kamehameha Schools 7 years ago, because many thought we 

were an institution that taught Hawaiian children, and not everyone that works for Kamehameha Schools is Hawaiian. But being a 

Hawaiian institution means that we need to understand what it is 

to be a Hawaiian institution. And that’s led us in the area of natural resource management to seek our roots, to understand in a 

primitive and primal way, what does that mean? And some of the 

things that are emerging, No. 1, from the Kumulipo, we didn’t 

come first; we came last. Well, what does that mean, to come last? 

We understand that coming last means that we have a responsibility to our elders, those who came before us, in the family that 

we’re a part of. It doesn’t mean that the elders don’t sacrifice for 

the family, and it doesn’t mean that we don’t sacrifice for the family. But consider the difference between that view and a view that 

was expressed at one of the conservation conferences a couple years 

ago where it was stated that conservation is what this person did 

after the bills were paid. And in the context of what we’ve heard 

today, I think the people that spoke out are taking the Hawaiian 

view that it’s not after. Conservation and taking care of your family 

is not what you do after the bills are paid. 

So what does that mean programmatically, and what are we trying to do with our land? I believe that it’s our responsibility to create and protect what we would call the aina momona. How are we 

going to build wealth to our land? And, again, I go back to the turmoil of the years past. In the past, building wealth to our land 

meant, in many cases, displacing Hawaiian people to create wealth 

in the economic sense, cash-flow. And God knows we needed it at 

certain times during our existence. But today, and in the last several years, it’s meant something else, especially on the land. It’s 

meant how can we create the kind of wealth that is wai-wai on 

these lands? What does it mean to have the kind of Hawaiian 

wealth? A place where, yes, there’s an abundance of natural resources endemic, yes, there’s an abundance of cultural opportunities and practices that are going on on those lands, and that education is happening on those lands, and that we’re looking at those 

lands in an entirely different way than just how can we create 

more money to educate Hawaiian children? It’s far more complex. 

It exposes us far more deeply to the risk of the extremes, if you 

will, but I think it’s the only way for us to do our part. But we can’t 

create aina momona in a society that’s sick. We can’t do that in a 

community that has got ice problems and has families that are broken apart, working several jobs, or sick neighbors that aren’t participating in a similar vision. 

I thank God, really, for the National Park over these many years. 

In my testimony, you’ll see that I take credit for Kamehameha 

Schools for starting the National Park—only 30,000 acres, but it 

was the first acres. And I think it came from a good place in our 

trustee’s heart. They felt that it was in better hands, safer hands, 

43

hands that could do better by it. Geri Bell is in the back there, and 

she’s done Pu’uhonua O Honaunau and other places that Kamehameha Schools owned. And I know especially at that time, looking 

back at the correspondence, it was painful to give something up. 

And that’s good; it should be painful. But it was in better hands. 

We have 26 miles of boundary with the park, and it’s my goal 

that we create our own national park model based on what we’ve 

learned from this national park, only it needs to be Hawaiian because of our Hawaiian institution. So I’m going to leave a few seconds on my testimony, but I hope I’ve answered your question. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Simmons follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF PETER SIMMONS, REGIONAL ASSET MANAGER, LAND

ASSETS DIVISION/ENDOWMENT GROUP, KAMEHAMEHA SCHOOLS

My Name is Peter Simmons I am testifying today on behalf of Kamehameha 

Schools. I am the Regional Asset Manger of our Land Assets Division on Hawai’i 

Island. Our divisions’ areas of responsibility on Hawai’i Island include 292,000 acres 

of Agricultural and Conservation lands on Hawaii Island. Hawaii Volcano National 

Park was created in the early 1920’s in the ma kai lower portion of the ’ili (smaller 

land division) of Keauhou, which is in the ahupua’a (larger land division) of 

Kapapala, Ka’u. These lands were owned by KS and they were given to the Federal 

Government; they comprise the core of the park. These lands include Halema’uma’u 

Crater and the lands surrounding it. In subsequent years, through a series of transactions Hawai’i Volcanoes National Park acquired from KS the remainder of our ma 

kai lands in Keauhou. In total about 30,000 acres of former KS land is a part of 

HVNP. In addition, the national park at Pu’u Honua o’ Honaunau was acquired 

from KS. 

We share 26 miles of boundary with the national park which includes 11 miles 

of HVNP’s recently acquired Kahuku property. At times, in the past our land use 

and the parks were similar (cattle were grazed in the park in its early days) as they 

were on our lands. Sometimes our land uses have been complementary as is the 

case today in that our weed and ungulate control at Keauhou, Ka’u enhances the 

parks environmental as their control of certain aggressive exotic species helps us 

achieve our environmental goals more efficiently. There are places where our management activities and strategies differ from those of the park. Presently we believe 

that while there are lands on which we desire to have no ungulates, there are other 

lands where we believe that the native ecosystems can and do significantly show 

signs of improved health by reducing but not eliminating ungulates. In some of 

these lands we have hunting, in some of these lands we have grazing especially to 

reduce fire risk through the reduction of fuels especially pyrophytic exotic grasses. 

Before the current era of large-scale, watershed, land partnership, there was sharing sometimes more limited than others of information, values and goals that influence how we viewed and mitigated the presence of aggressive exotic plants and animals. In the present era of watershed partnerships with the park and others, our 

alignment of values, agreement of common goals and accelerated and open information sharing is proving to be successful in the battle to control aggressive alien organisms. 

We are grateful to have HVNP as our neighbor, partner and friend in conservation. Areas where we can improve our control over exotic pests are being addressed 

and include:

• Fire modeling and control (Exotic plants generally reoccupy the land after fires), 

• General community and landowner education and outreach (neighborhood 

plants, cats, and mosquitoes negatively affect the quality of our native plants 

and animals), and 

• Endeavoring to reach deeper understanding Na mea o’ Hawai’i (Hawaiian Culture) to understand the indigenous culture’s perspective on ethno-ecological 

issues.

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much, Peter, for your mana’o, 

and I’m so glad you raised aina momona and also wai-wai as concepts in the life of the people. 

44

I have questions here for either Julie or Teya, and I have questions for both of you, but please feel free to respond to any of the 

questions. 

You both have identified several other Federal and State agencies that are partners with the committee in working on invasive 

species issues. Are there any lessons that can be learned from your 

work with any of the other Federal or State agencies that would 

be useful in improving your partnership with the National Park 

Service? 

Ms. LEIALOHA. As far as improving, I’m a person who actually 

started my career at this park, under the guidance of Tim Tunison. 

We’ve worked really closely for a very, very long time on a number 

of invasive species. 

With the Big Island Invasive Species Committee, our Federal 

partnership and our Federal partners have been very, very supportive and very strong with our partnership. We’ve been building 

additional partnerships with more concern with bringing in additional public partnership programs. There’s always room for improvement. 

The only thing I can say is that, like Teya mentioned, as a committee, we do meet on a quarterly basis, and, yes, we always agree 

100 percent on everything. That’s a very constant challenge. But 

our goal—and I have to say that the Big Island Invasive Species 

Committee, we’re a little ahead of the other invasive species committees by actually developing a completed strategic plan that we 

would like to expand at some point. And we do have a number of 

signed-on partners, actually signed on to our Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement. I can’t really say any more other than 

our current partnership program has been working relatively well, 

and the one thing that we do agree upon is that we agree to disagree. That’s about all I can say about partnerships. 

For the National Park Service, they have been, probably, the key 

instrument in developing our control strategies, which we’ve sort of 

taken from them and plagiarized to utilize in our control strategy 

programs. The Park Service has been very instrumental, with the 

help of Don Reeser and the early work of Tim Tunison and others 

in this room, and these are formulas that have laid the groundwork 

for actual invasive species control efforts. 

Teya, do you want to expand on that? 

Ms. PENNIMAN. I think I would have to say the same thing, just 

in terms of the importance of our partnership, especially with the 

National Park Service. 

But in addition to the funding and the strategy and the collectively trying to figure out how we do this and, to a certain extent, 

I don’t like to say, but I sometimes say, we’re just making it up 

as we go along. I mean, we don’t really have models for this. And 

I think that’s true for the EPMT program as well. It’s a very innovative program. But one of the most powerful things that I experience is when we pull together with our partners and actually work 

together on the ground. And one of the places we see that is when 

we’re working in Haleakala National Park, trying to control pampas grass, there’s nothing like seeing 25, 30 people strung out 

across the mountain, all engaged collectively in the same effort. 

There’s just a lot of power and strength to that. 

45

Senator AKAKA. You have highlighted, both of you, the importance of coordinating a rapid control response effort to combat an 

invasive species before it becomes a problem. From your experiences, what are the keys to a successful rapid control response? 

Julie? 

Ms. LEIALOHA. For our efforts, one of the key things is really 

public education, because we need the public to be our eyes and our 

ears in finding these organisms. As a classic example, the gallwasp, 

that was, again, a find by a member of the general public. We 

count on those things coming in, and then we count on our partners, especially our scientists, that are more in tune with identifying whether or not these will become invasive species. And then 

it’s our efforts in actually developing the rapid response with our 

partners to go out and actually do the control work. 

Our hit list, it’s not an ad hoc hit list. These are organisms that 

have been clearly identified as posing a serious threat to Hawaiian 

ecosystems. And one of our goals—and we constantly have to keep 

up—is the constant training of our staff in identifying these organisms, especially when it comes to bugs. We’re not trained entomologists. Many of our staff members are not trained botanists. We 

consistently have to train our staff to identify these species. And 

it’s also something we like to get more public participation in getting them educated in what we’re looking for so they can call it in 

and help us identify these species, and then create the coordinated 

effort to go out and do the actual control work. 

Ms. PENNIMAN. May I follow up? 

Senator AKAKA. Yes. 

Ms. PENNIMAN. A couple of things. 

I just would like to add, too, that one of our biggest obstacles as 

we’re working is always, of course, with imperfect information. The 

adage of invasive species work is ‘‘The more you look, the more you 

find.’’ So when conducting a rapid response, we’re responding to 

what we know. So one of our challenges is to constantly reassess, 

to build in feedback loops to ensure that we’re getting enough information that’s accurate, that’s timely, to know should we keep doing 

what we’re doing? Is it still feasible? Is what we’re doing doable, 

or should we cut our losses and move on? 

One of the models that is helping, I think, that’s been developed 

on Guam in particular is for addressing brown tree snakes. And 

the State has been very proactive in trying to train workers 

throughout the State in how to identify, how to locate, how to find 

snakes, and also developing and training people on how to initiate 

a rapid response so that there are people now throughout the State 

who will be able to set that up in a coordinated, consistent way, 

as opposed to all of us having to make it up each time we’re faced 

with that kind of a situation. 

Senator AKAKA. Teya, after reading your testimony, I was interested in the work that the Maui Invasive Species Committee is 

doing with local teachers and schools. Is the Park Service or any 

other Federal agency involved in the work with the schools, and 

can you tell me more about your work to involve local schools in 

this issue? 

Ms. PENNIMAN. Yes. This actually was an idea that came out of 

the Haleakala National Park education staff, which was to develop 

46

a curriculum that was Maui-based, essentially Hawaii-based, but 

using Maui as the model, with the concept that so many students 

in Hawaii have no concept of what there is here in terms of natural 

resources, in part because what they’re taught with are textbooks 

that come from the mainland, so they have no real context that 

they can relate to when they’re trying to learn basic scientific principles. 

And so a number of educators and interpretive staff at the National Park got together and began to develop a curriculum to address that need, developing a number of modules that will take the 

different parts, the different ecosystems, from the shore to the summit, and teach students about that, developing activities that they 

can conduct in their own back yards to learn about these very basic 

principles of ecology and science. It has been really gratifying. And 

then built into each of those modules are specific invasive species 

components. Unfortunately, because of lack of funding, the full nine 

modules have yet to be completed, but we do hope to be able to finish that to see that fully completed. One of the activities was to 

take students and train them to look at and to try and detect, try 

and learn what’s here and hopefully to be some of our early detectors. 

Also gratifying is that some local teachers took that concept and 

got additional funding from private foundations to implement that 

at their own school. So it’s been a very positive snowballing effect. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you, Teya, for that. 

I mentioned that I was interested in the schools. And, of course, 

Peter Simmons represents Kamehameha, and did speak about Hawaiian values and Hawaiian life, which is really basic in the culture and traditions of this land. And so I want to thank him for 

his written statement as well. 

And, Peter, I’d like to visit a little more with you about what you 

folks are doing with invasive species at Kamehameha. 

Mr. SIMMONS. When I first came to work with Kamehameha in 

the field of conservation and forestry and large landscape level agriculture, our entire budget was somewhat less than $40,000 a year 

statewide. That was mainly centered around our forestation program across the road that was being run by Ely Nahulu. I think 

we need to credit Ely Nahulu with the consistency from the early 

days. I believe he’s in his 27th year. 

With that little bit of money and our combined effort, every year 

and many times a year, students and staff go up and learn about 

what it is to be Hawaiian, what it is to be in that environment, and 

what it is to do restoration work. But in a year, $40,000 for this 

landscape that we are responsible for wasn’t nearly enough, and we 

were lucky that we had partners such as the National Park to help 

us and the Fish and Wildlife Service, and a great number of partners to help us even leverage that little bit of money at that time. 

In recent years, I’m happy to say that in terms of exotic plants and aggressive plants and animals, we are probably spending $1.4 

million directly. Right across the street again, Kamakani Dancil, 

who is here right now, is responsible for having initiated our rubus 

ellipticus program. I think he’s convinced us we need to spend a 

quarter million dollars next year, and that’s on top of $180,000 this 

year, and that’s on top of $10,000 or $12,000 to get it going. And 

47

Keala Kanakoli is sitting over next to Kama, and he’s helping oversee that both for us in terms of how people have addressed the 

land, but also did they bring the right cultural sense to it? 

Now we know that the kind of budget that we have right now 

statewide is not sufficient to do all that we need to do, and we’re 

not going to go out and start doing interdiction at the ports, although we agree with that. 

Inoa Thompson, our trustee, asked me how much money did I 

think was needed to take care of our natural resources? And I used 

a quick figure which was based on kind of a statewide assessment 

for bird habitat. I said for bird habitat, to improve it and make it 

ready to replace endangered birds that are growing across the way, 

the figure we have is $200 million a year. We own about 10 percent 

of the State, and I quickly came up with $20 million. And I thought 

the other trustees were not going to be so happy with me. They 

weren’t so happy to hear that. 

And Inoa, quite sagely, he was thinking, and he was pondering 

that, and he said, ‘‘You’ll never be successful, even with that kind 

of money, unless you get the people involved, and that’s not just 

through education, but through the cultural commitment and every 

means that we can, unless the people of Hawaii really get it, will 

never be successful even with that kind of money.’’

Now we have initiated a complimentary program to our Malama 

Aina program, which is called Aina Ulu: Grow the land, grow the 

people. We have about 22 small programs that are in various 

stages of development, from very mature programs, like the Edith 

Kanakaole Foundation, where we gave them land and they’re doing 

just fine with their curriculum, thank you very much, to other 

places, all the way to Kauai, to the Waipa Foundation, where they 

needed more help. We’re not trying to make these people who we’re 

trying to help become Kamehameha Schools. We’re trying to help 

them do what they do well, as long as it’s aligned with Kamehameha Schools. 

So we are beginning more and more to get people back to the 

land so that the people can help. Just like Ms. Penniman was saying, seeing 25 people lined up as volunteers is a lot more than just 

25 laborers going out to kill something. They take it to their family. 

The family gets it. And I think that’s how we’re going to change 

the society. We’re not proud enough of what we have. We don’t understand as a community what it is to be proud of what we have. 

We’re surrounded by exotic plants and animals, and people have 

commented on it at other locations. 

I would just like to mention one other piece, and that is something that I’m awfully proud about. And that’s one of our contractors, an outfit named Forest Solutions. They do the everyday work. 

They’re the ones that we pay to take care of some of the rubus 

problems and the like. For the last couple of summers, first with 

Kama’s help and always with Keala’s help, they have been hiring 

local kids to go out, as employees, but it’s not just a summer job; 

I think it’s a summer job like no other. They’re out with Keala, 

they’re learning what it is to be Hawaiian and being on the land 

as Hawaiian people, and they’re learning to take care of the land. 

And their families, I’m sure, appreciate the education and the fact 

that their children are learning a lot more than just about a sumVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:57 Dec 15, 2005 Jkt 109209 PO 24981 Frm 00051 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 P:\DOCS\24981.TXT SENERGY2 PsN: PAULM
48

mer job. So in every way that we can, we are determined to use 

what means we have, both in the classroom and the classroom 

that’s up at Keauhou. 

I should mention quickly that a little less than a year ago, we 

bought back the lease at Keauhou Ranch, the upper section of the 

’ili of Keauhou that we’re in right now. We bought that back from 

the lessee, and with the help of many of the people in this room, 

we went through a very, very rigorous planning process, and we 

are using the entire 34,000 acres for education, for cultural enrichment, for stewardship, and to the extent that it bouys up those 

goals, those items we will consider economic development. It’s a 

plan like no other, and I appreciate the help of the people in the 

room that have helped build the plan. 

Senator AKAKA. Well, mahalo, Peter, for all of this—for your 

mana’o, your feelings, and I like your thought of, you know, we’re 

the last here, and we’re responsible. We’re responsible for what’s 

here, and that’s true. And what we are trying to do here is just a 

part of being responsible. And I say mahalo nui loa for your part 

in this and all of the people that you mentioned as well. 

Before we conclude this hearing, I want to thank all of you for 

coming today, and I want to again thank all of our excellent witnesses for their testimony. I think this hearing has made clear the 

enormous needs and challenges to control invasive species in Hawaii and nationally, and I would like to inject that we need to keep 

in mind doing it culturally and traditionally as well. 

The message I will take home to my colleagues in the Senate is 

that successful control of invasive species means strategies for both 

prevention and not just treatment or control. This hearing has 

made clear that we must do more at the national level, both in 

terms of new authorizing legislation and increased appropriations, 

to allow the Federal Government to be a better partner with States 

and with nonprofit entities as well if we are to make a difference 

with this issue. 

Finally, I would like to again say mahalo nui loa to Cindy and 

the wonderful staff here at Volcanoes National Park for all your 

help with this hearing. This has been a beautiful hearing. The setup has been so nice. The results have been great. And it’s all because of what you’ve done, Cindy, you and your wonderful staff, 

and many others here. 

I also want to say thanks to our staff, Tom, Dave, and Shirley 

from Washington, who came all the way out here to help with this 

hearing. 

And with no further ado here, I’d like to say again mahalo nui 

loa, thank you very much, and this hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:27 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(49)

APPENDIX 

RESPONSES TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS

RESPONSES OF LLOYD LOOPE TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR AKAKA

Question 1-3. What are some of the invasions that pose the worst threats to the 

parks in Hawaii? How did these invaders get to Hawaii in the first place and what 

damage do they do? What measures are needed to prevent more of the same? 

Answers. Senator Akaka and Senator Wyden, thank you so much for the opportunity to give the best answers I can to these challenging questions. I came to Hawaii in 1980 as the first Research Biologist for the National Park Service at 

Haleakala National Park on the island of Maui. My job was to conduct research and 

advise the park on strategies and techniques for protecting its biodiversity and ecosystems. I was transferred to my current agency, U.S. Geological Survey, in the 

mid-1990s, with little change in mission and fortunately more authority to work outside the park. 

In the 25 years I’ve been in my job on Maui I’ve learned the hard way that by 

far the greatest threat to the national parks and the highly endemic island biota 

is the barrage of invasive non-native species introductions. Many of them are introduced intentionally, including most of our worst invasive plants, as for example the 

invasive tree Miconia, which was regarded as just another pretty plant when it was 

introduced to Hawaii in about 1960. Many others—including insect pests and diseases—are not introduced on purpose but are hitchhikers primarily on horticultural 

and other agricultural goods that come in through our ports-of-entry—our airports 

and harbors—both from foreign countries or from the U.S. mainland. 

Hawaii, an isolated oceanic archipelago with 10,000 endemic species that occur 

nowhere else in the world, is especially vulnerable to biological invasions. One consultant to USDA (Russell McGregor) back in the 1970s noted that per unit area, 

the rate of alien insect introduction in Hawaii is 500x that of the continental United 

States. And it’s no better today, yet remarkably Hawaii still has largely intact natural areas. Yet Hawaii doesn’t get any special consideration from the federal government’s effort at our borders for prevention from invasive species. Allowing the NPS 

to work with and assist in funding of partnerships to combat invasive species before 

they reach park boundaries seems to me to be a sound first step in untying the 

hands of the NPS to more fully address the invasive species threats to our natural 

and cultural heritage. 

Often there are huge gaps among agency mandates. An important event in my 

personal education was an outbreak of rabbits at Haleakala National Park that took 

place in 1990, 15 years ago this month. The park dodged a bullet and eradicated 

the rabbits, but not until we had removed 100 rabbits. Afterward, we learned that 

a thoughtless pet owner had released about 6 rabbits in the park 10 months earlier. 

It was one of the more spectacular success stories I’ve ever been involved with. If 

we hadn’t succeeded, the island of Maui, including the cabbage farmers in the 

upcountry agricultural area, would have had to deal with millions of rabbits within 

a few years. Maui people instinctively realized this, and the park has never enjoyed 

so much praise from the local community as during those months right after we 

eliminated the rabbits. But we learned that if the infestation had been outside the 

park, no one other than the landowner would have had a mandate to eliminate the 

rabbits. The Hawaii Department of Agriculture told us that their mandate was to 

encourage rabbit raising, in cages, of course. We wondered whether, and still wonder, if the rabbit infestation had occurred just outside the park boundary on ranch 

land, for example, would the park have been able to legally act to eradicate rabbits 

in cooperation with the ranch? The national parks definitely need such a mandate. 

The rabbit incident inspired me while still working for the NPS, to take on the 

Miconia issue in 1991 after that destructive neotropical tree was first discovered on 

Maui in the Hana area, about 5 miles from the park. Then park superintendent Don 

Reeser, though very supportive of my efforts, cautioned me that people might quesVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:57 Dec 15, 2005 Jkt 109209 PO 24981 Frm 00053 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\24981.TXT SENERGY2 PsN: PAULM
50

tion whether a NPS employee had any authority to get involved with on-the-ground 

work on land outside the park. Fortunately, partners recognized the severity of the 

situation and came forward to work with us in a succession of events that eventually led to formation of the island invasive species committees. But the National 

Park Service desperately needs authority to work with partners and spend funds outside park boundaries to protect the parks. There are many examples of this need, 

but I believe there are no better examples than rabbits and Miconia on Maui. 

I mentioned above that many of the destructive invasive species that threaten the 

parks and Hawaiian biodiversity were introduced intentionally and many others 

were introduced unintentionally. Prevention of such introductions to Hawaii, both 

intentional and unintentional, at U.S. and State borders (ports of entry), is almost 

entirely under the mandate of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Hawaii Department of Agriculture (HDOA). Prevention of invasive pests that threaten natural areas is, however, at best a secondary priority for any of these federal or state departments. For 

Homeland Security, the priority is obvious—national security. For the agriculture 

departments, the priority (quite understandably) is protecting agriculture. Border 

protection is of course an extremely difficult undertaking and secondary priorities 

understandably tend to fall through the cracks. But Hawaii needs special protection 

if there is to be hope of protecting more than fragments of its natural heritage into 

the future. I must say that in my opinion HDOA’s Plant Quarantine Branch under 

Neil Reimer is striving as best they can to prevent threats to natural resources as 

well as agriculture. Dr. Reimer as well as Mark Fox of The Nature Conservancy, 

part of the second panel today, will address the phenomenon of federal preemption 

and some measures that could be effective toward shoring up the best prevention 

efforts of HDOA. 

Some very damaging invaders of have recently breached federal and state border 

control efforts. Many of these are not just threats to natural areas but threats to 

horticulture, agriculture, and in some cases human and animal health as well. 

HDOA has an informative system of New Pest Alerts at http://www.hawaiiag.org/

hdoa/npa.htm. Adequately conveying the severity of Hawaii’s current invasive species crisis as 

it affects national parks, endemic biodiversity, and Hawaiian culture in Hawaii is 

a daunting task, but I’ll briefly summarize the status of just six recently introduced 

pests that are especially damaging. I could be wrong (and would be delighted to 

stand corrected) but I’m pretty sure that the ones that likely came to Hawaii from 

foreign countries would not have been considered actionable quarantine pests if 

intercepted by DHS/USDA at the international Ports of Honolulu or Kona, because 

none of them would be considered threats to mainstream U.S. agriculture. This may 

well be a rational national response to the challenging demands of protecting U.S. 

agriculture from foreign pests in this age of free trade. But I think it is important 

to at least consider the cumulative toll being taken on the natural and cultural heritage of Hawaii and Pacific islands, as manifested in national parks and elsewhere. 

Erythrina gall wasp (Quadrastichus erythrinae): This species was first reported on 

Oahu in April 2005. It was originally probably from Africa but most likely passed 

to us from Taiwan (where the species is invasive and recent outbreaks occurred) in 

flowers or nursery material. All of a sudden, this very tiny wasp (males are 1mm 

long, females 1.5mm) is currently in the process of killing almost all Erythrina on 

Oahu, both the endemic species (wiliwili) and the cultivated species. There are recent reports of new neighbor island records of the gall wasp near the Kona (Hawaii 

island) airport (7/21/05), the Kauai airport (7/26/05) and downtown Kahului, Maui 

(7/30/05). Sadly, the prospects for Maui’s Pu’u-o-Kali wiliwili preserve and the 

wiliwili in all the national parks on Hawaii island are absolutely frightening. As 

little as three years ago, the magnificent native wiliwili trees on Maui seemed to 

be ‘‘bulletproof.’’ Three years ago a seed-eating bruchid beetle (Specularius 

impressithorax) from Africa suddenly arrived and was soon attacking almost all 

wiliwili seeds. Today, as a result of arrival of the Erythrina gall wasp, the possibility of survival of wiliwili, until now one of the few abundant endemic tree species 

in remnant areas of lowland dry areas of Hawaii, into next year is even in doubt. 

This is especially unfortunate because of the traditional importance of wiliwili for 

native Hawaiians in making outriggers of canoes, surfboards, and lei. 

For updates on this rapidly evolving issue, see http://www.hear.org/issues/

wiliwilionmaui/

’Ohi’a rust disease (Puccinia psidii): Another plant trade-related introduction, this 

newly established (April 2005) rust, most likely arrived with a plant shipment from 

Florida or possibly a foreign country somewhere in the neotropics, poses a potentially formidable threat to Hawaii’s ’ohi’a (Metrosideros polymorpha) forests. This is 

of course alarming since ’ohi’a comprises over 80% of Hawaii’s still-intact forest. The 

51

rust seems to have a broad host range within its family (Myrtaceae, including 

mountain apple, guavas, eucalyptus, etc.). This rust disease that attacks new, actively growing leaves is not just a threat to Hawaii’s forests. New Zealand will be 

looking out to protect its beloved Metrosideros forests. Australia is definitely concerned for its 600+ endemic species of Eucalyptus. Though it has so far been detected only in forests on Oahu, Maui HDOA has found ’ohi’a rust disease in shipments from Oahu to at least two big box stores on Maui. 

Nettle caterpillar (Darna pallivitta): Another one from Taiwan, this is a human 

health threat (various levels of discomfort ranging to occasional anaphylactic shock 

and blindness) as well as a serious environmental pest, attacking palms and related 

plants. Dr. Arnold Hara of UH-CTAHR in Hilo has stated (quoted in the Honolulu 

Star-Bulletin) that it is a worse pest than the notorious coqui frogs. The vector via 

which it arrived is obviously nursery material, and it is likely spread daily on Hawaii island (along with coqui, etc.) by infested nurseries. In spite of HDOA efforts 

at interisland quarantine, Maui HDOA has documented it at least once in a shipment from the Big Island to a Maui nursery. Unless some biocontrol agent is located 

and processed rapidly through the extremely restrictive system, this pest will soon 

be in rain forests of Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. 

Little fire ant (Wasmannia auropunctata): This tiny neotropical ant has devastating effects on biodiversity and human quality-of-life in its invaded range in farflung parts of the world (e.g., Galapagos, New Caledonia, West Africa). It was first 

detected here in Puna, Hawaii, in 1999, and HDOA is now reporting it from 50 sites 

on Hawaii island. Its localized spread after its initial discovery has been associated 

with transport of nursery plants. There is an HDOA interisland quarantine for little 

fire ant, and to date it remains confined to Hawaii island, except for a small population on Kauai that is under control but not eradicated. The poorly understood effects of this species in blinding mammals, perhaps by stinging their corneas [e.g., 

P.W.Walsh, P. Henschel, and K.A. Abernathy, 2004, Logging speeds little red fire 

ant invasion of Africa. Biotropica 36(4):637-641] are just now starting to appear in 

housecats in the Puna area of Hawaii island. 

Scale insect of hala (Thysanococcus pandani): Hala (Pandanus tectorius) is common to abundant in many Hawaiian coastal ecosystems and an extremely important 

plant species for native Hawaiians, who have traditionally used it for cordage, 

thatching, healing, decoration, etc. The scale insect arrived on the island of Maui 

in 1995, apparently on a shipment of hala brought in to a botanical garden from 

somewhere in the western/southern Pacific. Hala is currently sickly with yellowing 

leaves over much of windward East Maui, though the insect’s effects have not yet 

reached the Kipahulu section of Haleakala National Park. Hala is an important 

component of the national parks in the Kona area of Hawaii island. Long-term effects of scale attack on hala populations are likely to be severe, but that is uncertain 

at this point in time. The South Pacific island of Rarotonga, in the Cook Islands, 

apparently lost its Pandanus in the 1920s from a similar accidental insect introduction. 

Cycad scale or sago palm scale (Aulacaspis yamatsui): This hearing is focused on 

national parks in Hawaii, but my agency, the USGS Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, also does work in other Pacific islands, including Guam, the location 

of War in the Pacific National Historical Park. Guam has more than one million 

trees of the Micronesian endemic cycad Cycas micronesica, a magnificent tree that 

reaches heights of 80-100 ft., and all currently seem to be at risk from attack by 

this scale insect. Cycad scale reached Florida, transported on cycads from native 

Thailand in 1996, reached Hawaii (which has no native cycads) on cultivated cycads 

from Florida in 1999, and reached Guam from Hawaii in 2003. There are said to 

be 30 nurseries in Guam that bring in nursery stock from Hawaii. Guam is said 

to be tightening up its regulations for horticultural imports because of recent pest 

incursions, including cycad scale and coqui frogs. 

And finally I must mention a species not in Hawaii or any Pacific island yet—

the Red Imported Fire Ant (RIFA, Solenopsis invicta) that is poised to invade from 

either side of the Pacific Rim—from California (where Hawaii gets most of its goods 

and where RIFA was first discovered in 1998) and China/Taiwan/Hong Kong (where 

RIFA first got a foothold in 2004-05). It seems clear that RIFA can invade Hawaii 

and Pacific islands based on various models of potential habitat, as well as by the 

fact that it has invaded many Caribbean islands over the past two decades. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit for the record as well my article ‘‘The Challenge of Effectively Addressing the Threat of Invasive Species to the National Park 

52

* The article has been retained in subcommittee files. 

System.’’ This was published last fall in the journal Park Science, and I have an 

electronic copy.* 

Note: The views expressed in this testimony are those of the author, given as a 

conservation scientist in response to Senator Akaka’s questions, and do not necessarily reflect the views of USGS, the Department of the Interior, or the United 

States Government.

Æ